Marvel fans have wondered since Charles Soule first took over the reins of Daredevil how the protagonist was able to once again obtain a secret identity. Guys like me were generally just happy he was back in New York City without cheesy red business suits and a life in San Francisco, so we were willing to let the question linger. Running with the Devil, however, will finally address the elephant in the room.

As regular readers know, I was not particularly a fan of Mr. Soule’s handling of Father Jordan in Daredevil #16, but overall he has recovered nicely. The cherry on top of a solid issue is a funny swipe at the infamous One More Day storyline that forced Peter Parker to essentially make a deal with the Devil. As a long-time fan of The Amazing Spider-Man, jokes at the expense of OMD are always welcome surprises.

Anyway, for the full rundown on DD #17, check out my latest YouTube review. As always, feel free to hit the “subscribe” button if that format is up your alley.

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.

12 comments

  1. This was a good issue and start to the arc. Soule has stated that he enjoyed Waid’s run, and that shows here, but in order not to undermine his own run, Soule also eloquently explains all of the drawbacks to Waid’s version of the character. By the end Waid had deliberately and harshly stripped the uniqueness from Daredevil and left him a generic sunny superhero.

    Frankly, due to his love of the Silver Age, I think Waid just doesn’t get darker superheroes. Based on how he’s written Daredevil and also Batman in his JLA run, he seems to think they are broken, and he has to fix them in order to match the lighter ones. The first thing he does when he gets his hands on a darker superhero is to remove the darkness in order to make them fun, completely missing that the darkness itself is part of said fun. In contrast, Soule has said that he’s aiming for “deep, dark ambitious storytelling,” and IMHO that’s exactly the right approach to Daredevil.

    On a similar note, I’d like to recommend the new Kingpin series written by Matthew Rosenberg with art by Ed Torres. Not only is Daredevil in it, it’s a nice treatise on the insidious seduction of evil.

    1. “Frankly, due to his love of the Silver Age, I think Waid just doesn’t get darker superheroes. Based on how he’s written Daredevil and also Batman in his JLA run, he seems to think they are broken, and he has to fix them in order to match the lighter ones.”

      Interesting analysis, Sunni! I didn’t read Waid’s DC stuff, so I appreciate hearing your feedback.

      Regarding Soul, there is no way I’m going to argue with “ambitious storytelling.” 🙂 Marvel better hold onto him for a long time because he’s firing on all cylinders these days.

  2. What happened to Garney’s art. I used to love his style on JLA, Captain America, and Hulk but this looks like he is trying to be a combination of David Aja and Scott McDaniel. Doesn’t work for me.

    I used to love Daredevil, was the first book I would sign up for whenever I would start a sub. But even if I wasn’t on a Marvel ban I would still not pick him up anymore. Part of what I always loved about Daredevil was his faith and how that played with his day job and his night job and everything he has seen. But very few writers every seem to be able to understand that aspect of him. The TV show has been very good at that, but the comics not so much.

    As always thanks for the review and the insight into something I wouldn’t normally get to see.

    1. “As always thanks for the review and the insight into something I wouldn’t normally get to see.”

      Thanks for taking the time to stop in and offer your opinion, CopperAge. I appreciate it! One of those days I’m going to try and start writing more reviews. I’ve been trying to build up the YouTube channel and that takes up a lot of my free time.

  3. Kind of funny that the issue seemed to thumb its nose at OMD; over on the CRB forums now, Dan Slott has been posting on some relevant “Spider-Man” threads, stating that OMD were never be reversed at any point in time; there’s something at Marvel corp. that makes it an impossibility, even assuming there was new management that wanted to (or at least having a management that’d want to isn’t in the cards at all). He hasn’t really explained what he means by all that, so I’m not really sure what to make of it all.

    If he’s right (and he would be in a better position to know than the rest of us) and not smokescreening any future projects (he has done that with stuff like “Superior Spider-Man”), it does make one wonder why some series have been vaguely referencing OMD, as if foreshadowing some kind of revisiting or something.

    1. “Kind of funny that the issue seemed to thumb its nose at OMD; over on the CRB forums now, Dan Slott has been posting on some relevant “Spider-Man” threads, stating that OMD were never be reversed at any point in time; there’s something at Marvel corp. that makes it an impossibility, even assuming there was new management that wanted to (or at least having a management that’d want to isn’t in the cards at all). He hasn’t really explained what he means by all that, so I’m not really sure what to make of it all.”

      Yeah I saw that. Man, he is really losing his shit and going on the warpath over there. And according to him, if I understand this correctly, no creative team in the future will ever be able to reverse or undo OMD even if they wanted to because there will be something in place that will prevent them from doing so. I really don’t see how the hell something like that would even be possible?

    2. Pfh. He’s lying, like he always does. Marvel can do anything it wants with any of its characters, any time.

  4. “Yeah I saw that. Man, he is really losing his shit and going on the warpath over there.”

    Yep, I don’t get what he’s so mad about, since whatever the fans want has no real effect on Marvel’s decision and it’s not his call whether OMD is kept or reversed. If he’s just getting tired of the discussion, all I can say is that it’s been ten years and post-OMD Spider-Man is still reviled, so the argument’s not going anywhere soon.

    “And according to him, if I understand this correctly, no creative team in the future will ever be able to reverse or undo OMD even if they wanted to because there will be something in place that will prevent them from doing so. I really don’t see how the hell something like that would even be possible?”

    Slott has since offered an explanation. Apparently there’s a huge number of higher ups who would need to approve reversing OMD, not just one or two top editors. Evidently, the unanimous decision is that OMD must stay in place to keep the quality of the brand and Slott believes that that will never change. How he knows that the people who hold the offices in the future will believe the same as the current generation, I don’t know. Otherwise, I guess it makes sense.

    The real answer, as I think it is, is probably this; it could be reversed if everyone who needed to sign off on it did, but Slott believes it’ll never happen. Only time will tell whether that changes or not. Me personally, I’m not going to hold my breath over it, but given that the 616 comics are no longer that relevant to the franchise as a whole and the other facets are predominantly friendly to the anti-OMD faction, I think we’ll be generally okay.

    1. “Slott has since offered an explanation. Apparently there’s a huge number of higher ups who would need to approve reversing OMD, not just one or two top editors. Evidently, the unanimous decision is that OMD must stay in place to keep the quality of the brand and Slott believes that that will never change. How he knows that the people who hold the offices in the future will believe the same as the current generation, I don’t know. Otherwise, I guess it makes sense.”

      I suppose the decision to reunite Peter and Mary Jane may cause some people at Sony to complain if they wanted to keep him younger, but Sony has zero control over what Marvel does with the two characters. Given that the two companies are now tired together contractually, they may be a bit more kind in certain respects. However, to say that Marvel is fine with essentially killing Peter Parker for well over a year — but not reuniting him with MJ — is silly on Dan’s part.

  5. Just to clarify something on Weblurker’s posts…Slott actually said he was very open to the possibility of OMD being resolved and Peter and MJ getting back together…but that he just did not forsee that resulting in the marriage being snapped back into place.

    Now, Web and I have been disscussing this past weekend’s comments at length over on the Technodrome forums, and we both feel that it’s a bit of a weird idea to hope OMD is “reversed”, but at the same time…not reversed. It kind of leaves you going “eh” at the notion…as if he wants to defeat the purpose of excitement for a OMD resolution because ultimately any story that does won’t be a “proper” resoloution, which would result in a dicey obliteration of over ten years worth of Spider-continuity, most of which has been by Dan’s design. It makes sense for him to be protetctive of that. It’s his life’s work.

    And then Slott went on some crazy spiel about how the young interns of the future are all kids who have never grown up with a married Spider-Man…yet I’m sure many of them will become aware through back issues and future trade collections of the reality there was a 20 year marriage era, and that they are also working for a company producing Renew Your Vows even as we speak with hopes of it being sustained for the long-term.

    In a lot of these posts he makes, it seems Dan is flip-flopping substantially on the subject and making subtle contradications that he may or may not be aware of himself, and it could be a misdirection trick.

    1. “In a lot of these posts he makes, it seems Dan is flip-flopping substantially on the subject and making subtle contradications that he may or may not be aware of himself, and it could be a misdirection trick.”

      Dan Slott Doublespeak? Shocker! 😉

    2. I grew up without the Spider-Marriage. I remember when it happened even if I wasn’t reading the comic at the time because Marvel made it a big deal. You can find a news story on YouTube where Stan performed a “wedding” for Spider-Man and MJ in one of the New York stadiums. I thought it was a good growth of the character and I’m still pro-Spider-Marriage. I’ve even debated Kurt Busiek, one of my favorite writers, over it on Twitter. It’s the writers who not only don’t want the marriage, but some think he should still be in high school.

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