iim-tony-doom

It was just under one year ago that Brian Michael Bendis’ Invincible Iron Man launched. Yours truly was excited at its potential, and even gave the first handful of issues rave reviews. Then, something weird happened. IIM became a plodding tale about Tony Stark’s search for an identity. He sat around his lab and, for all intents and purposes, did his own version of Derek Zoolander’s, “Who am I?” into a puddle of water.

IIM #13 is the culmination of a book that promised to take readers to great places when in reality it only gave them Victor Von Doom (looking quite a bit like Rand Paul) locked inside an energy bubble.

zoolander-who-am-i

Here is what you need to know about IIM #13:

  • Doom takes Tony to Cambridge, where biochemical engineer Amara Perera is illegally testing her experimental Alzheimer’s drugs.
  • Doom and Tony argue about whether or not they are friends or enemies.
  • Tony tries to explain why he didn’t tell his girlfriend that he was going undercover or get word to her that he didn’t die in Japan.
  • Amara Perera tells Tony “I don’t know anything about you,” and moments later he confesses his love.
  • Tony tells Amara about James Rhodes dying, leaves, and then spends time in his lab thinking about Rhodey. He does not attend the hero’s funeral.
  • Doom returns to torment Tony and is locked inside “a zero-point energy web net.” Tony says he wants answers. “You’re going to tell me why you’re all over me. Why? Why have you decided to be in my life all of a sudden? Why? Why me?” he asks.

Marvel fans already have a good idea how all of this will turn, given that IIM is going to be launched with RiRi Williams as Ironheart — and that Infamous Iron Man, “Iron Doom” will launch in October.

Before we move on, let us go over our Mighty Marvel Checklist:

  • Superior Spider-Man? Check.
  • Hydra-Cap? Check.
  • Infamous Iron Man? Check. 
  • Bruce Banner killed because he might go Infamous Hulk on everyone? Check.

Interesting pattern, Marvel. It seems like Tony isn’t the only one having an identity crisis…

iim-amara

What makes IIM #13 even worse is that Mr. Bendis is doing — on a much smaller level — what Dan Slott did with Peter Parker’s “close” girlfriend, Lian Tang (i.e., the one who tried to murder him).

It has been established that Amara Perera is a smart woman, but she and Tony’s “relationship” consists of a small bit of playful banter and cross-talk early on in the book. How does that translate into “love,” and why would Tony say that to a woman who a.) agreed to be “taken off the grid” by Doctor Doom, and b.) suddenly calls the villain “Victor”?

Answer: It would not translate into love.

Tony would not say that, and readers should be insulted that Bendis would make him go there with a woman who has always been skittish about his lifestyle, personality, and double-life as Iron Man.

iim-tony-stark-love

In short, if you have read IIM this long then you may as well buy the last issue before the relaunch. If you are considering Infamous Iron Man for you pull list, then just be aware that Iron Doom may essentially be the tale of Victor Von Zoolander.

Advertisements

About the Author Douglas Ernst

I'm a former Army guy who believes success comes through hard work, honesty, optimism, and perseverance. I believe seeing yourself as a victim creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. I believe in God. I'm a USC Trojan with an MA in Political Science from American University.

42 comments

  1. So is it just me or is Marvel turning all of the classic white male heroes into villains or some twisted version of what they were in the past. Marvel needs to clean house, I am not a fan of reboots but the last few years have much more character assassination than a loyal long term reader can take.

    1. “So is it just me or is Marvel turning all of the classic white male heroes into villains or some twisted version of what they were in the past.”

      The owner of my local comic shop said one of his employees came to him and said, “I can’t sell Marvel to people like I did in the past. What am I doing wrong?”

      His reply: “You don’t understand what’s going on at Marvel.” He told the guy that Marvel is in many ways its own worst enemy.

      “Marvel needs to clean house, I am not a fan of reboots but the last few years have much more character assassination than a loyal long term reader can take.”

      Marvel’s editors will not rest until they have created a generation of loyal…DC Comics fans. 😉

    2. I have been a loyal long time reader since the age of ten, but no longer. I’m pretty much done with Marvel comics, I’m only actually just buying two titles these days. I don’t know if that’s going to increase or not, only time will tell.

      The other contributing factor is Marvel books are overpriced in comparison to the quality of product, plus in Australia you’re paying another $2.00 per book, so for me it’s become an expensive hobby not worth pursuing if I’m not enjoying it like I used to.

      The owner of my LCS understands my frustration with Marvel and has admitted he’s seen quite a drop of Marvel titles from customer’s pull lists. Now that is saying something.

      I sincerely hope things will change in the future, it needs to clean house of the deadwood that has polluted it since the 90’s.

      Thankfully there are smaller independent companies publishing quality books. I probably sound contradictory, but I’m at a point where I really don’t care what happens to Marvel’s comic division any more.

  2. It is as if they have let their ego and world view dictate what they do in the MCU. They are treating the brand like a soapbox and it is driving fans away. They can brag about the new readers all they want but it has not translated into sales. Marvel was the world outside your window, is it now? no, it is the twisted perception of reality outside the Marvel writers safe space.

  3. The team that “saved” Marvel in the 1990s is burned out, and they all need to move on to fresh pastures and be replaced by people who grew up somewhere other than New York City.

  4. Did you not read Secret Wars? Doctor Doom was changed (you know, no more pizza face – maybe even no more despotism…). Superior Spider-Man was the best run of Spider-Man in years. Not only was it interesting, but it showed how Peter’s memories could change Doc Ock into a nicer guy. IIM looks like a lot of fun. I’ll be there for it. Riri Williams… that’s another story. Where I come from, calling someone a “re-re” isn’t a compliment.

    1. “Did you not read Secret Wars?”

      I read “Secret Wars” when it came out in 1984, and I had plenty of action figures. In fact, I have a “Secret Wars” Iron Man figure that is still in the original packaging.

      “Doctor Doom was changed (you know, no more pizza face – maybe even no more despotism…).”

      It’s still a dumb move on Marvel’s part to turn him into a Rand Paul-ish pseudo-villain.

      “Superior Spider-Man was the best run of Spider-Man in years.”

      If the “best run” of a Spider-Man book requires Peter Parker to be…dead, then the writer is doing something very wrong.

      “Not only was it interesting, but it showed how Peter’s memories could change Doc Ock into a nicer guy.”

      Instead of trying to kill six billion people in one fell swoop, he just blows a guy’s face off at point-blank range, amasses an army of Superior Goons, and fills NYC with his own brand of police state surveillance. I’m not impressed.

      “IIM looks like a lot of fun. I’ll be there for it.”

      I hope you circle back and let us know what you think. I’ll at least review the first three issues.

      “Riri Williams… that’s another story. Where I come from, calling someone a “re-re” isn’t a compliment.”

      Agreed. I’m not sure how Bendis missed that one, although he also missed the fact that Ironheart is a Japanese porn parody of Iron Man. Ouch.

    2. orboros…Superior Spider-Man was a complete mess where everybody acted like a grade-a moron to justify Ock staying in Peter’s body far longer than necessary, and Doc Ock didn’t need Peter’s memories to make him a nicer guy, just look at the stories in the 90s where he saved Peter’s life or when he tried to cure his ex of cancer.

      Superior is a far worse story than OMD, or is most certainly on par with it. The credit for the best run of Spider-Man in recent years goes to Renew Your Vows or the newspaper strip for reminding us of how Peter Parker OUGHT to be.

    3. “IMO, Superior Spider-Man is the worst Spider-Man story penned by the worst Spider-Man writer ever.”

      I think a lot of people can pick up on the verve or enthusiasm or whatever you want to call it that Dan Slott had while writing SSM, and they conflate that with good overall storytelling. There were issues of SSM that were obviously penned with a kind of energy that Dan has lacked on ASM, but when you really start to analyze the writing it breaks down (e.g., characters being dumbed down to keep the story going, Doc Ock essentially having zero character development, Peter having no realistic reactions to the ordeal once he returned).

      I’m happy that Dan had a good time writing SSM, but little children also have a good time finger paining. That doesn’t make them tiny Picassos.

    4. I have bunch of Secret Wars toys from 84 as well. I loved that series. But it doesn’t mean I can’t enjoy last year’s epic. Take off the grumpy pants for a spell.

      Superior Spider-Man shot a villain so he can’t be a hero? I’m sorry you don’t like The Punisher either. Those are usually pretty good too, especially the Nathan Edmondson run.

      Mile’s Morales’ Ultimate run was great too, even though it required Peter Parker to be dead. I guess the grumpy pants just can’t swapped out sometimes, eh?

    5. “I have bunch of Secret Wars toys from 84 as well. I loved that series. But it doesn’t mean I can’t enjoy last year’s epic. Take off the grumpy pants for a spell. […] Mile’s Morales’ Ultimate run was great too, even though it required Peter Parker to be dead. I guess the grumpy pants just can’t swapped out sometimes, eh?”

      You have no serious counter to anything I said, so your response is that I wear “grumpy pants.” Slow clap for oroborosc4f. I’m the guy who has consistently given Daredevil rave reviews; I enjoyed at least the first six months of Invincible Iron Man; I’ve given Bendis’ Spider-man a handful of good reviews; and I gave Dan Slott kudos for Renew Your Vows.

      Translation: You have no idea what you’re talking about.

      “Superior Spider-Man shot a villain so he can’t be a hero? I’m sorry you don’t like The Punisher either.”

      Now you’re moving the goalpost. Your originally said SSM was good because it showed how Doc Ock changed into a “nicer guy.” He obviously did not. You were called out on that, and your response is to start talking about the Punisher. (Yes, I hate Punisher so much that I said Jon Bernthal was awesome in the role and that Daredevil Season 2 was amazing. Oops, you lose again. I hope you show up when I review Netflix’s upcoming Punisher series.)

      “Superior Spider-Man shot a villain so he can’t be a hero?”

      Perhaps you missed the memo, but people who resort to vigilante killings on city streets are not “heroes.” At best they are anti-heroes in the Marvel Universe. There is a distinct difference.

      You seem to think that just because a character isn’t up my alley that I can’t correctly identify good and bad writing. Weird. I watched 2012’s Judge Dredd and loved it. I can’t believe more people didn’t see it.

      I watched John Wick opening weekend and was thrilled with Keanu Reeves’ latest effort. Both of those characters, in your mind, I would not be able to like because of “grumpy pants.” Wrong again. You really should think a little harder before posting. You’ll save yourself some embarrassment.

    6. Wow. You REALLY don’t get it. I mean, you HONESTLY SERIOUSLY don’t get it. It’s hilarious that you’re either this obtuse or this amazingly ignorant. You don’t have to be a dick about everything. You can admit that you’re completely clueless on how to respond instead of swinging so far out in left field that you start running touchdowns in a baseball game.

      Shit, I liked this blog for a while. You had smart conservative points to make about an industry slider farther and farther to the left. But somehow you decided that you either had to act completely clueless to the points being made or type out horrible misinterpretations to build yourself up. Either way, your Rich Jonhston-esque clueless approach doesn’t work, especially when you ignore key storylines and major plot points because you jumped to an early conclusion about something that later turned out to be wrong.

      I seriously hope you can grow beyond this at some point down the line before alienate everyone that might somehow dare to call you out on something you missed and/or ignored.

      Proverbs 11:2

    7. “Wow. You REALLY don’t get it. I mean, you HONESTLY SERIOUSLY don’t get it. It’s hilarious that you’re either this obtuse or this amazingly ignorant. You don’t have to be a dick about everything. You can admit that you’re completely clueless on how to respond instead of swinging so far out in left field that you start running touchdowns in a baseball game.”

      Definition of “dick” to oroborosc4f: “Someone who disagrees with oroborosc4f by providing evidence to back his claims, links, etc.”

      Good luck with that.

      I suppose everyone in this thread who agrees with me “HONESTLY SERIOUSLY” (Dan Slottian all-caps included) doesn’t get it, too. You’re the only one who isn’t “completely clueless.” Gotcha.

      “S**t, I liked this blog for a while. You had smart conservative points to make about an industry slider farther and farther to the left. But somehow you decided that you either had to act completely clueless to the points being made or type out horrible misinterpretations to build yourself up. Either way, your Rich Jonhston-esque clueless approach doesn’t work, especially when you ignore key storylines and major plot points because you jumped to an early conclusion about something that later turned out to be wrong.”

      Translation: “S**t, I liked this blog…until you disagreed with me and refused to just accept my point of view.”

      I have to “build myself up”? What the heck does that even mean? This blog isn’t my career. Writing is my vocation, but this blog is something I do in my spare time. I don’t write to impress guys like you, nor does it bother me when someone disagrees with me. In fact, I haven’t even thought about this exchange since the last time you commented. Nice try, though.

      “I seriously hope you can grow beyond this at some point down the line before alienate everyone that might somehow dare to call you out on something you missed and/or ignored.”

      Again, I’m failing to see why you’re so angry and “alienated” that I disagreed with you. You’re a big boy, aren’t you? Big boys have disagreements sometimes, and then they get over it.

      “Proverbs 11:2”

      There it is — the parting biblical shot. Yes, you’re right, I’m so filled with pride because I … actually defend my point of view when a reader pushes back. Good one.

      I love it when readers respond with “dick” and “s**t”-laced lectures that end in biblical admonitions about pride. Classic! If you find yourself using the Bible as a shield the moment you get into a tough debate (in a comic book discussion, no less), then you may want to rethink your approach. You look desperate.

      Let the record state that oroborosc4f was the first one to resort to personal attacks and expletives. Telling.

    1. “So, how about those… DC Comics?😛”

      I’m pretty sure I longingly looked at DC’s “Rebirth” titles and my face just said, “I can’t believe Marvel is doing everything in its power to make me a DC-guy!”

  5. Based on Ock’s thought-balloons in the Living Brain, it seems like he learned absolutely nothing from his time in Peter’s life. Which is too bad, since if he had it would have made him a more interesting villain.

    1. “Based on Ock’s thought-balloons in the Living Brain, it seems like he learned absolutely nothing from his time in Peter’s life. Which is too bad, since if he had it would have made him a more interesting villain.”

      Didn’t Peter essentially “beam” everything into Ock’s brain before dying? It really did have zero effect on him. His behavior was the equivalent of, “Hmmm, that’s mildly amusing. Moving on with my Ock-ness now…”

  6. “So is it just me or is Marvel turning all of the classic white male heroes into villains or some twisted version of what they were in the past. “

    Probably a stupid question, but is it possible that some of this is being done to get fresh story material on decades-old characters? Many of them have been around a long time, and you can only do so many variations of Iron Man blasting the guy stealing his tech. (Playing devil’s advocate and not saying that the results are good results. Just wondering about the motivation for doing this in the first place.)

    “Marvel needs to clean house, I am not a fan of reboots but the last few years have much more character assassination than a loyal long term reader can take.”

    “Marvel’s editors will not rest until they have created a generation of loyal…DC Comics fans.”

    Very funny!

    “Did you not read Secret Wars?”

    I didn’t (not really a big fan of those kind of stories), although I did read Slott’s Spider-Man Secret Wars installment and really liked it overall, so there is that.

    “Superior Spider-Man was the best run of Spider-Man in years.”

    Tried reading it and really hated what I could force myself through. Now, in all fairness, I was never in the target audience, but I think I agree with Doug Ernst that if Peter Parker is gone and that makes “Spider-Man” “good,” then something is really screwy.

    I’d actually argue that Bendis’s “Ultimate Spider-Man” run (at least up till “Ultimatum”) is the best “Spider-Man” run in years, given a fairly consistent level of quality, some exploration of stuff beyond the basic fights, good characterizations all around, and a decent capturing of the franchise’s tone and themes. (Your mileage will vary, of course.)

    Speaking of USM, I find it really interesting that one of Doug’s complaints about Bendis’s current “Iron Man” is that the love story with Stark and his girlfriend is really lacking in the writing department, when Bendis did a fairly good job with the leading couple in that. Guess all writers have their successes and drops in quality.

    1. “Probably a stupid question, but is it possible that some of this is being done to get fresh story material on decades-old characters?”

      Remember, we’re dealing with Axel “hobby for white guys” Alonso, here. I do not give Marvel the benefit of the doubt any time a story doesn’t pass the political-activism sniff test.

      “Many of them have been around a long time, and you can only do so many variations of Iron Man blasting the guy stealing his tech. (Playing devil’s advocate and not saying that the results are good results. Just wondering about the motivation for doing this in the first place.)”

      While it’s true that certain recurring themes, etc., can get stale, there is an infinite number of cool stories out in the universe. It’s the writer’s job to pluck them from the cosmos and present them to the reader as only he or she can.

      “I think I agree with Doug Ernst that if Peter Parker is gone and that makes “Spider-Man” “good,” then something is really screwy.”

      Yes! If you agree with me, that means that there is a high probability that Dan Slott will accuse you of falling under my mind control! 😉

      “Speaking of USM, I find it really interesting that one of Doug’s complaints about Bendis’s current ‘Iron Man’ is that the love story with Stark and his girlfriend is really lacking in the writing department, when Bendis did a fairly good job with the leading couple in that. Guess all writers have their successes and drops in quality.”

      In this instance it has nothing to do with the dialogue leading up to the “I love you” moment, but the fact that they’ve been on maybe two dates. I can’t remember all the details, but even the character tells Tony that she knows nothing about him. It’s like Bendis is acknowledging how ridiculous it is, but hoping you’ll forgive him for even going there.

      Again, we have an instance where a writer seems to own up to a flaw in the story but then he acts as if that makes everything okay. It doesn’t.

    2. I’m with Doug on this one. I won’t give the Marvel the benefit of a doubt on this one, either, largely because Alonso’s regime hasn’t given me a reason to. Comments like “hobby for white guys” really says it all. Plus, we’ve all seen how the way people like Slott lash out at fans who disagree with their diversity replacements, so I think it’s safe to assume that they’re doing it to appease the SJWs, not because they want to freshen things up. Like Doug said, there are plenty of cool stories that could be told, but they’re more interested in scoring points with the Tumblr crowd than they are telling stories that would appeal to everyone.

      I can’t play the devil’s advocate for Marvel’s people (I don’t play the devil’s advocate for people in general anymore) because I’ve seen how they act online and what they say in interviews.

  7. So, in conclusion, typical Bendis outcome? Feh, that guy’s writing has become so predictably dull it’s not even worth playing drinking games to, anymore. Interesting set-ups, followed by seemingly endless talk points, talk points, talk points… than an underwhelming culmination that makes you wonder if he even cared enough to understand how his characters work. Or was that Dan Slott’s playbook? But whateves. They’re all the same to me at this point.

    I find it funny how a man that keeps spouting SJW grievances makes a badly written “Harlequin romance novel protagonist” out of Tony Stark, pining for someone for no believable reason. But I guess that criticism only applies if the protagonist is female…

    1. “Interesting set-ups, followed by seemingly endless talk points, talk points, talk points… than an underwhelming culmination that makes you wonder if he even cared enough to understand how his characters work.”

      Body blow…body blow…body blow. That one did some damage! He’s going to have blood in his urine for a couple days after that one. 😉

      “I find it funny how a man that keeps spouting SJW grievances makes a badly written ‘Harlequin romance novel protagonist’ out of Tony Stark, pining for someone for no believable reason. But I guess that criticism only applies if the protagonist is female…”

      Zing! Another good point.

  8. My continuing belief that Bendis HATES writing action scenes gathers more and more data… thank you, Doug.

    Agreed. I’m not sure how Bendis missed that one, although he also missed the fact that Ironheart is a Japanese porn parody of Iron Man. Ouch.

    Oh you did get my link! I hoped you had a laugh at it. 😉 lol

    1. “Oh you did get my link! I hoped you had a laugh at it.😉 lol.”

      I saw it in my Twitter feed and managed to ignore it…and then when you sent me the link I was like, “Well, I guess this is legit.” Haha.

  9. Having you go through the Bendis mill brings me no pleasure.

    He’s the worst kind of writer to me because he can draw you in…knowing full well he has no intention of bringing you the kind of entertainment that you thought you would get.

    1. “Why does Victor Von Doom look like Rand Paul?”

      Tony’s undercover identity looked like Luke Perry, so who knows what’s up with this decision.

      I do find it interesting that Doom looks rather familiar to a Republican presidential candidate. Marvel is the same company that turned Trump into an alternate dimension version of M.O.D.O.K. What are the chances that Doom would ever look like, say, Martin O’Malley? I’d say slim to none.

  10. I’ve long since dropped this book, it became clear after Marquez left there seemed to be no energy behind Bendis’ vision. And yes, his girlfriend ditching him seems perfectly justified, her reaction is normal even if she is in the wrong on another level for her practices…Tony saying he loved her seems more like an attempted measure of control than, of manipulation, than a sincere attempt at emotional reconciliation.

    Tony just wants a hand held out for him while he grieves.

    Bendis also succeeded in colossally wasting Mary Jane as a character in this book. She just leaves Tony to sulk in this issue. This is the woman who, in an iconic moment, closed the door behind her to comfort Peter after Gwen died? No, she most certainly isn’t, that woman will return in Renew Your Vows in just two months to come, and I’m hoping what Conway does with her really topples the treatment she’s had with Bendis and Slott.

  11. “Remember, we’re dealing with Axel “hobby for white guys” Alonso, here. I do not give Marvel the benefit of the doubt any time a story doesn’t pass the political-activism sniff test. While it’s true that certain recurring themes, etc., can get stale, there is an infinite number of cool stories out in the universe. It’s the writer’s job to pluck them from the cosmos and present them to the reader as only he or she can.”

    I see. Given that I’m not a pro-comic writer, I sometimes wonder what the actual thought process is and if it’s always what we think or assume. I remember for a writing class exercise, I used a female-centric character. I suppose if the story ever sees publication, some readers could infer that I had some kind of agenda for not using a male lead, when in reality the only reason I used a female character was because I though she would make a fun protagonist and she just happened to be written as a girl when I came up with the concept in the first place.

    (Because of my interest in writing, I also find it interesting to read author’s comments on the creation process, and the factors that change the story from first outline to final publication.)

    “Yes! If you agree with me, that means that there is a high probability that Dan Slott will accuse you of falling under my mind control!😉”

    I heard about “Superior Spider-Man” long before I found your blog and my gut reaction was: “I hate this premise. I do not want read it.” Not only because the “One More Day” setting is my number two deal breaker and because no Peter Parker is my number one deal-breaker, but found the idea in and of itself sickening.

    Prior to “Superior’s” publication, my opinion of Dan Slott came down to: “I don’t want to read any of his post-OMD stuff because of that status quo, but I hope he writes good stuff within that setting and I might be curious to read anything else he works on.” After that hit stands, all I could say was: “I don’t think I want anything to do with his work. Get him off Spider-Man ASAP, please. He’s ruining the brand.”

    In fact, I first found this blog because I was trying to see if there was anyone else online who disliked the “Superior” comics, too. (And if he thinks I mindlessly agree with everything you say, I don’t think he reads this blog very carefully, since I haven’t aways agreed and try to respectfully explain why/offer counterpoints.)

    “In this instance it has nothing to do with the dialogue leading up to the “I love you” moment, but the fact that they’ve been on maybe two dates. I can’t remember all the details, but even the character tells Tony that she knows nothing about him. It’s like Bendis is acknowledging how ridiculous it is, but hoping you’ll forgive him for even going there.”

    Well, I did think that in “Ultimate Spider-Man,” Bendis did a decent job with the build up, even beyond the dialogue. I was just commenting on the irony of him dropping the ball on something he’s proven capable of doing before. However, when your writing on a regular basis for a living, it does stand to reason that not all stories/ideas are going to be good ones or be up to scratch.

    Out of curiosity, how many issues was the Iron Man/Amara Perera relationship built over? (I know, for comparison’s sake, that Ultimate Peter and Mary Jane didn’t get together until the thirteenth issue of their series, or the end of the second story arc. They also had the background of being close friends for a long time and the thirteen issues did indicate that they already loved each other on a platonic level and had a strong bond going in, along with a string of clues that Mary Jane, at least, was starting to see Peter as more than a friend.)

    “Again, we have an instance where a writer seems to own up to a flaw in the story but then he acts as if that makes everything okay. It doesn’t.”

    Yeah, I can’t think of an example where that has worked. (Okay, maybe as a punchline in a comedy or story that doesn’t take itself seriously, but that’s not the case here.)

    1. “Hmm…I first came here because of gay Iceman. Guess bad comics did serve a useful purpose!”

      Haha. True! Marvel’s weird editorial decisions have in many ways allowed me to meet some pretty cool readers. I guess every cloud has a silver lining.

      I love it when random trolls say to me on here or YouTube that “about five people” come here. I should take screenshots of my WordPress stats. Just because there aren’t hundreds of people commenting it doesn’t mean that thousands aren’t reading each month (average of 25,000 if I hit three blog posts per week).

      Yesterday I had people coming here from a website called “Comic Geek Speak” based on Nighthawk’s cancellation. Someone mentioned that David Walker should not be alienating tons of readers on social media and added a hyperlink to my recent coverage of his “bag of d***s” Twitter rants. My guess is that a couple of the people who came here will stick around. Every drop in the bucket counts.

      Blogging is definitely more of a marathon than a sprint. 😉

    2. Your site serves an important purpose, a place for fans like us to go.

      The drive-by’s would call it a ‘place for racist comic book fans’. The modern liberal…and yes this is ideological…is obsessed with keeping ‘their’ places clean of bad influence and aggressively moderates views they don’t like on the major popular sites. Sure, you can walk in and say ‘Dan Slott sucks’ and you will even get some support…but you have to be careful about the ‘whys’….very careful. It’s clear that some people will be allowed to be ad hominem in their discussion…while certain views will not be tolerated.

      It says something that even the apolitical can come here and offer an opinion on something about comics that’s upsetting them and not have a large number of people show up like a flash mob and point out that you’re a racist, sexist and probable child murderer. It’s wrong, even a person opposed to you can come here and make their case, and it doesn’t have to be personal. It’s their near fanatical obsession with what they’ve been force fed that causes them to come here and discuss things in the most rude and insulting manner.

    3. “Your site serves an important purpose, a place for fans like us to go.”

      If that is what readers like you think, then I’m doing my job. 😉 I got so sick and tired of seeing moderators but their entire fist on the scale in favor of one particular worldview. If you go off the ideological plantation, then your comments go down the Orwellian Memory Hole on mainstream comic book websites.

      “The drive-by’s would call it a ‘place for racist comic book fans’. The modern liberal…and yes this is ideological…is obsessed with keeping ‘their’ places clean of bad influence and aggressively moderates views they don’t like on the major popular sites. Sure, you can walk in and say ‘Dan Slott sucks’ and you will even get some support…but you have to be careful about the ‘whys’….very careful. It’s clear that some people will be allowed to be ad hominem in their discussion…while certain views will not be tolerated.”

      Boom. You nailed it.

      “It says something that even the apolitical can come here and offer an opinion on something about comics that’s upsetting them and not have a large number of people show up like a flash mob and point out that you’re a racist, sexist and probable child murderer. It’s wrong, even a person opposed to you can come here and make their case, and it doesn’t have to be personal. It’s their near fanatical obsession with what they’ve been force fed that causes them to come here and discuss things in the most rude and insulting manner.”

      Yep. I honestly don’t care if someone disagrees with me, and I don’t really pull out the knives until I’m personally attacked or its some anonymous troll who only wants to throw bombs in a digital drive-by.

      There are a lot of regular readers who will comment for the comic book stuff, but they stay far away when I get into presidential politics, national security issues, etc. And that’s fine. Like you said, this isn’t a blog where I’m going to take it as a personal affront if a reader disagrees with me. If someone wants a good debate, then I’m game. If not, then that’s cool too.

  12. Sadly Superior was one of Slott’s better stories, and that is not a compliment. He has the potential to write a good story when he avoids trying to be constantly trendy, funny, writing the characters out of character, and sticks the ending properly, sadly we do not see that often. Online he hides behind his twitter brigade and blocks anyone that proves him wrong in order to protect his frail ego.

    I do not have faith in Marvel stories anymore, I do not think Marvel has faith in their stories either since they are resorting to using minorities as a marketing gimmick “which I find offensive”. When was the last time Marvel did not have to rely on a gimmick to sell a book? How about writing good stories and let the word spread, or make some great “new” characters, not temporary minority replacements.
    The Marvel talent pool is dry of ideas or lazy.

    Now DC, they seem to have received the message from fans and are doing some damage control.

  13. “I do not have faith in Marvel stories anymore, I do not think Marvel has faith in their stories either since they are resorting to using minorities as a marketing gimmick ‘which I find offensive’.”

    Or maybe they have faith that they can do new stuff and get people to love that too, like they did the old stuff?

    “How about writing good stories and let the word spread, or make some great “new” characters, not temporary minority replacements.”

    To play devil’s advocate, is it possible that some of the stuff we don’t like is actually not that bad, but because of our personal biases, it rubs us the wrong way or isn’t something we enjoy? I’ve gathered that a lot of the material that is not well-liked by those of us who hang out here tends to get decent reviews.

    1. From what I’ve seen, most of the good reviews are from critics who are Twitter friends with the comic writers, and they don’t want to say anything bad because if they do, they’ll lose access to the creators. You’ll notice how no one ever calls out certain writers out for their lack of professionalism online, apart from blogs like Doug’s. To me, that’s a sign they desperately want to be a part of the club, and if they say anything negative about the creators and their comics, they won’t get a chance to sit at the cool kids’ table.

      Blogs like Doug’s are really the one places where you can get honest reviews of things.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s