Superior Spider-Man #30 is finally here, and with it comes the guy we’ve all been waiting for: Zombie Peter Parker. Fans are supposed to rejoice now that Dan Slott’s “memory fragment” of Peter Parker has assumed the role of Spider-Man after Doctor Octopus decided to call it a day — conveniently as everything was crumbling around him. With great power comes…ducking responsibility? Since the real Peter died in Amazing Spider-Man #700 and the downloaded Otto maybe-sorta-kinda just committed suicide, fans are left to wonder: Does Spider-Man have a soul or is he an empty husk whose able to say witty one-liners and think about Uncle Ben from time to time? I suppose it’s possible that the real Peter Parker was simply brainwashed the entire time, which would mean that Dan Slott made him do all those dastardly deeds over the course of SSM’s run, but that’s a whole other can of worms.
Regardless, for those who want to know how SSM #30 transpired, all you need to know is that Otto’s love interest, Anna Maria, is being held hostage and will die unless Spider-Man finds her. As all the evil Ock has done as Spider-Man has come back to haunt him, he realizes that only Peter Parker could save Anna, and thus he relinquishes the role of the hero back to Peter.
Fans of the book are supposed to sniffle just a wee bit as Otto disappears into a Dr. Manhattan-blue mind dust and gets wind-swept into the super unknown. This fails because people who aren’t suffering from anterograde amnesia remember that this is the same character who blew a guy’s face off at point blank range only months ago.
And it’s the guy who wanted to surpass “Pol Pot, Hitler and Genghis Khan” in terms of evil perpetrated upon the world — “combined!” just over a year ago.
So the question becomes: Was it worth it? If you’re like Dan Slott and you only think in terms of sales, then yes.
If you’re like the retailer who went online to criticize the book because some things (i.e., the integrity of a character) are more important to you than a buck, then no.
Justin Bieber sells a lot of tickets, but the world knows he’s no Jack White. Dan Slott sells a lot of comics (by 2014 standards), but the world knows that sales are but one metric by which success is measured. As the years go by, critics will come to regard the Superior Spider-Man more as a bizarre embarrassment in the character’s rich history than a run to be treasured and adored.
To make matters worse, there’s also collateral damage to consider. Take how dumb The Avengers have become during the course of Superior Spider-Man. Their stupidity reaches a crescendo in issue number #30 as Iron Man and Captain America freak out about an “illegal medical facility” that Spider-Man turned a blind eye to. Blowing off a guy’s face as he’s on his hands and knees in front of you? Eh. Taking a page out of President Obama’s NSA spying scandal playbook and putting an entire city under surveillance? Zzzz. Amassing a militia of thugs and arming them with an arsenal that would cause Libyan Islamic terrorists to giggle like schoolgirls (if they allowed girls to attend school)? Yawn.
Didn’t go through the proper bureaucratic red tape necessary to open a medical center? Gasp! Dan Slott’s and Christos Gage’s Captain America wants to “arrest” that man. The Department of Health and Human Services is going to hear about this one, buster.
Should the world be happy that Peter Parker is back? Sure. But the problem is that we don’t know if he’s back because, as far as Dan Slott is concerned, a “memory fragment” without a soul is just as good as the real thing.
And with that, I give you a preview of Jack White’s new album “Lazaretto.” Dan, since I know you’re reading this, I suggest listening to “High Ball Stepper” while imagining me doing the vocals two inches from your face. As long as you continue to write Spider-Man, I will continue to write high ball steppin’ reviews. Cheers.
The history of Dan Slott trolling the Internet in search of wrongs to right is well known. He scours comic websites, Twitter feeds, Facebook groups and YouTube accounts looking to play “Slott Bakula” in his own version of Quantum Leap — even as he whines about tight deadlines. The funny thing is, when it comes to douglasernstblog.com, he has always chosen to try and slime me from a distance. Doing so allows him to sling all sorts of ad hominem attacks, knowing that the vast majority of the people will not fact check him. Oddly enough, he now talks about me on YouTube.
Dan Slott’s Twitter buddies wrote about me on Newsarama, and when I started to make him look bad I was suddenly banned. When users defended me, the entire thread was locked. (The url to “The Inferior Online Debate” is now dead.) Dan Slott also took to Twitter to insult me and sic his followers on me. He couldn’t resist talking about me over at Comic Vine, and the moderator had to chide him for his behavior. He couldn’t resist douglasernstblog.com talk over at Comic Book Resources and turned to the moderator to shut down the thread when he couldn’t goad me into saying something worthy of a ban. He even resorted to making weirdly-veiled legal threats over at Comic Vine at one point. To top it all off, there are the Orwellian Marvel boards at his disposal, which I also fell victim to over the years.
Here’s how I found out Dan Slott decided to take his attacks on me to yet another social media platform: a reader pinged me to let me know that in Dan Slott’s world, when you disagree with him it means that you must have fallen victim to the Douglas Ernst Jedi Mind Trick.
Note: A college student who disagrees with my politics and much of what I say just so happened to agree with a good portion my analysis regarding Superior Spider-Man. The comic is so bad that it transcends ideologies. Dan Slott’s reaction? The guy must be an idiot who can’t think for himself.
Even though this student disagrees with much of what is said on this blog, because he’s roughly on the same page as me regarding Superior Spider-Man, Dan Slott labels him a mindless automaton spewing “talking points.” Insulting. Dan Slott is all about winning over hearts and minds over at Marvel.
As usual, when I came in to defend myself Dan Slott starting hurling bizarre attacks in an attempt to derail the discussion or possibly predispose certain readers to outright dismiss anything I said. While most people want to talk about Superior Spider-Man on a YouTube video about Superior Spider-Man, Dan Slott wants you focused on Trayvon Martin, Global Warming and a post I did Doctor Octopus’ desire to “transcend” the evils perpetrated upon the world by Hitler, Pol Pot and Ghenghis Khan “combined” (not to be confused with Bleeding Cool’s article, which described Superior Spider-Man’s “Nazi-like” torture practices).
I deny Global Warming, according to Dan Slott. (I thought it was “Climate Change” these days, Dan. Which is it?) Here’s what I actually said on the matter, so the world can see how intellectually dishonest you are, Mr. Slott:
There is no doubt that the climate “changes.” The question is: How big of a role does man play? Is it big enough to warrant the redistribution of wealth — to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars — from the private sector to a bureaucratic Leviathan? Answer: No. Is shaving a few degrees off computer models that even the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change now admits are flawed worth the price in individual liberty? Of course not.
And then there was Trayvon Martin:
Here’s what I actually said, to show how intellectually dishonest Dan Slott is:
I don’t know if Zimmerman is “guilty.” Guilty of what? Murder 2?
An act is “imminently dangerous to another and demonstrating a depraved mind” if it is an act or series of acts that: a person of ordinary judgment would know is reasonably certain to kill or do serious bodily injury to another, and is done from ill will, hatred, spite, or an evil intent, and is of such a nature that the act itself indicates an indifference to human life.
I would say there is plenty of reasonable doubt. You? You apparently think that Zimmerman hunted this guy down in cold blood in “Rambo” fashion and deserves to go to prison. You also seem to have an endless list of excuses for a high school kid punching a man in the face. I can honestly say that if I was walking through a neighborhood late at night and an adult asked me what the heck I was doing I would not punch him in the face.
The guy who “just” came within inches of an extinction level event because he hated all of humanity is now housed in Peter Parker’s body. And fans “love” the story. It’s what brought them back to the book. Congrats Mr. Slott, those are the kinds of winners I want giving me high fives and pats on the back at comic conventions…
Poor Slott Bakula — he can never reunite with Al in the future because every time he tries to right wrongs…he’s the one who is wrong.
Dan Slott has spoken to the Associated Press about the return of Peter Parker, and the news service has dutifully played its role as Marvel’s mouthpiece — the perfect interview for a guy who prefers Orwellian message boards for critics of his work. Strangely enough, the guy who gleefully treated Peter Parker like a “meat puppet” for over a year now wants to assure fans that as he messes with the character’s earliest history he will do so in a way that “lovingly respects” the canon.
Dan Slott, who has been writing Spider-Man for Marvel since 2008, said the new story not only pays homage to the first 1962 appearance of the Stan Lee and Steve Ditko-created character, but peels back more layers of what was going on in the first volume of the 700-issue “The Amazing Spider-Man,” which began in March 1963.
“When you’re looking at things in those issues, you’re going: ‘Wait a minute! How did this happen? How did he get this? Where did this come from? Why didn’t Aunt May ever wonder about that?'” he said.
The five-part story titled “Learning To Crawl” starts May 7 with “Amazing Spider-Man” 1.1 and concludes in September with issue 1.5. Slott is writing the interlude with art by Ramón Pérez. Artist Alex Ross has painted each of the story’s five covers. …
“You start looking at it closer and closer and you go, ‘There’s a story here that we’re not seeing,'” he said. “A very pivotal and crucial story that lovingly respects everything that went on but tells you more, so much more about Spider-Man and so much more about Peter Parker.”
Do you remember when Dan Slott’s Superior Spider-Frankenstein went exactly where critics said it would — “Nazi-like” torture, I believe Bleeding Cool called it? Do you remember when Dan Slott’s body-snatching rapist was confirmed in issue #22 of Superior Spider-Man, and the type of person who crawled out of the woodwork to defend it was of the “it’s not rape if the perpetrator doesn’t climax” persuasion?
“I’m wondering if all the Ock- is-a-rapist whiners ever even read the issue? It’s clear two pages later Otto is berating his minions for “interrupting him at the worst possible time” which implies the deed wasn’t completed.” — Rick
Marvel has itself a brand new fan base on its hands. I suppose these days they probably let guys get Spider-Man subscriptions behind prison bars, so what does it matter to them? (When sales are all you’re after, who cares if Mr. “the deed wasn’t completed” is touting the book.)
Over the past few years the “brain trust” at Marvel:
Destroyed Peter’s marriage.
Had the deal with the devil (for all intents and purposes) go down.
Had him treated like a meat puppet when a megalomaniac took over his body.
Lowered the IQ of the supporting cast by about 30 points in order to appease people who like their Spider-Man fresh off a quest to kill six billion people.
Now ask yourself: Do you really expect Dan Slott to “lovingly” respect Peter Parker’s past? If you need help answering, look to his Twitter feed:
“If you write serialized stories, it’s not your job to make the reader happy. Your job is to captivate & entertain them. You’re Scheherazade” — Dan Slott
Let’s run with that, shall we? If Dan Slott believes his job is not to “make people happy,” wouldn’t it stand to reason that his job is also not to make people angry? If so, why were his stories pitched as creative endeavors that would “get you angrier than you were after Spidey #700!”? He’s just fine with making long-time readers angry if it will fuel sales, but making them “happy”? What kind of fool does that?
Dan Slott and Marvel decided they would fuel sales by tapping into fan anger, which is rather sad.
In truth, Dan Slott has nothing in common with a character from ‘Arabian Nights.’ He’s much closer to Celia Gimenez:
Dan Slott’s work on Spider-Man is reminiscent of the woman who tried to restore a 19th-century fresco of Jesus and turned it into an abomination. The finished product isn’t popular because it is beautiful, but because it is so incredibly weird and bizarre.
Impressed? Dan Slott’s fresco will also include a new villain:
“He’s got his first villain who is his own age, someone that he’s inspired. … He’s a troubled teen hero fighting a troubled teen villain!” Slott said.
Let’s hope that Marvel can do better than “Freak” this time.
Dan Slott has shown that he only respects the history of Peter Parker that he likes, and furthermore his”loving” affection is for his interpretation of that history. Unfortunately, that interpretation is steeped in moral relativism.
If you are a betting man, I would not put money on “Learning To Crawl” to remotely come close to returning Peter Parker’s respectability.
When trailer for The Amazing Spider-Man came out a few years ago, I was generally impressed with the product. While I felt there was absolutely no need to reboot the franchise after the supreme letdown that was ‘Spider-Man 3’ (aside from Sony’s desire to keep the rights from falling into Marvel’s hands), the trailer did pique my interest. Notably, in two-and-a-half minutes there were very little special effects — aside from the first-person point of view shots that begin at 1:43. With ‘The Amazing Spider-Man 2’ there are plenty of special effects teasers, and they’re pretty cringe-worthy. Will I go for the story, which does look interesting, but stay to laugh at the special effects? We shall see.
Before delving into the special effects, one first needs to discuss the “villain” concern. There are three of them — and everyone knows that packing a movie with too many villains is a dangerous endeavor. Director Marc Webb seems like a nice guy — but can he juggle? That’s the big question. When it comes to creativity, that’s up for debate.
Take, for instance, his reasoning behind the “Rhino” armor:
Marc Webb: One of the tricky things to translating characters from the comics that work in illustrations into the three-dimensional reality on a New York street — and often things that work quite well as a drawing — [is that they] don’t make sense in the physical world. And so, we wanted to make Rhino into something as powerful he is in the comics, and as sort of simple minded and direct as he is in the comics but with a suit that felt of this world. There’s certain hints about its creation. It’s only teased in the movie. It’s not really a big part of the film. I wanted something to create something that felt majestic and quite powerful but something Aleksei could have put together himself.
On some level, he makes sense. On another, it’s a complete cop-out. The trailer highlights quite clearly that they went with all sorts ideas that “don’t make sense in the physical world.” The challenge for the director is to figure out a way to make it work. Correction: In this case it’s up to the director and Sony Imageworks to figure it out. If they didn’t have the budget or the time to do Rhino properly, maybe they shouldn’t have done him at all.
As it stands, the walking tank outfit looks bad. Oscorp is genetically engineering everyone in the film accept the guy who calls himself “Rhino”? One would think that Oscorp would be keen on developing technology that would allow soldiers to coat themselves in Rhino-like skin. Get in bed with the government and the Department of Defense and it’s even harder to bring you down, right? I guess not.
The images released for the trailer look like something straight from a Playstation or XBox game, and in some cases they look worse.
Do the special effects make Spidey look like The Amazing Rubber-Man, or am I just getting old, picky and spoiled? It’s hard to complain about Spider-Man movies when you’re old enough to remember a time when they didn’t exist… Maybe I should just count my blessings and focus on the positive — namely, the story.
As it pertains to creating intrigue, Mr. Webb gets high marks:
Marc Webb: I don’t want to reveal to much of the plot but Peter learns things about his past, and at one point his future, provocative ways.
“Secrets have a cost, but the truth does to.’ I think there’s a line that Aunt May said in the first move, which was: “Secrets have a cost, Peter.” We recap that line and re-imagine it a little bit. She said ‘I once told you that secrets have a cost, but the truth does too,’which means that any way you cut it there’s going to be challenges ahead.
The big prominent villain in the film is Electro, but there are many adversaries Spider-Man is going to have to face. But the evil empire — the consistent thing between them all — is the evil empire known as Oscorp, or what’s becoming this evil empire. And I think that’s something that may inform people’s viewing of the trailer. Questions will be answered. … I wouldn’t say it’s a dark movie, but there is very powerful forces at work that are emanating from Oscorp. Oscorp is the place from which all nasty things emerge in this movie, and Spider-Man is going to have to confront that.
The Amazing Spider-Man trailer is awkward, because every time there are real actors on the screen a sense of mystery is there. Dane DeHaan has the “it” factor. He really seems like an intelligent kid with a dark, dark side to him. Dare I say it? They should have dumped Electro and just went straight to the Green Goblin.
Aunt May’s “secrets have a cost” line works well as shots of Peter’s ‘A Beautiful Mind’/John Nash-ish room and Richard Parker’s subterranean lair flash across the screen.
Who is that guy in the shadows with the hat walking by The Vulture’s and Doctor Octopus’ gear? The kid in me is begging my adult side to run to the ATM.
Sadly, for every moment worth getting excited about there are two or three cheesy special effects that induce a wince. Electro (or was that Superman Blue?) looks silly, and the Goblin costume looks like it was put together by someone with a do-it-yourself goblin kit. If ‘Captain America’ could pull off Red Skull, there’s really no excuse why Sony couldn’t make the Green Goblin respectable. It would be a shame if because of self-imposed tight shooting schedules and release dates that fans get half-baked villains for one of America’s coolest superheroes.
At the end of the day, the trailer for ‘The Amazing Spider-Man 2’ is a mixed bag. Will Jamie Foxx turn out a performance of ‘Django Unchained’ caliber, or … ‘Booty Call’? Will the special effects sink the film, or is Spider-Man popular enough around the world at this point in time that it’s almost impossible for his movies not to at least break even? Perhaps the second trailer will make its box office potential clearer.
Watch the trailer below if you haven’t seen it and let me know what you think.
In December of 2012 I examined what it would mean if Dan Slott’s body-snatching Spider-Man slept with Mary Jane under false pretenses. If I had a twin brother, pretended to be him in the dark, and slept with his groggy wife I would be a monster. Likewise, if Doctor Octopus — living a lie in Peter Parker’s body — sleeps with a woman, for all intents and purposes he is a rapist. These are uncomfortable truths, but truths we must face because this is the state of the comic book industry in 2013.
With Superior Spider-Man 22, Dan Slott’s creation goes full body-snatching rapist. Didn’t anyone ever tell Mr. Slott and Marvel’s editors never to go full-rapist? (i.e., They could have “merely” kept it to Doctor Octopus pleasuring himself — in Peter’s body — to thoughts of Mary Jane.)
[W]hile I have seen stories in which bad guys have used stolen bodies to get laid (the Buffy-Faith body swap is the example I can think of right now), I don’t think I’ve ever seen a romantic relationship in such a scenario unfold naturally over the long term quite like the relationship between “Peter” and Anna Maria. After months of development, that relationship reaches a new stage in this issue, as the art and dialogue strongly imply that the two began to have sex until they were interrupted by “Peter” being called to action as Spider-Man. Obviously, obtaining consent through deception makes Otto despicable. Earlier in this run, it seemed like practically every online discussion regarding Superior Spider-Man I came across was dominated by anxiety over whether Otto, impersonating Peter, would sleep with Mary Jane, and whether such an event would constitute rape. Curiously, I have not seen the same online fervor now that Otto has actually done this to someone. People in the comments section, can you help me figure out why that is?
Indeed, Chris. Asking: “Here, now? Are you sure?” and then having Anna Maria reply “Yes. I’m not wasting a moment either…” is more than a strong implication. Those two glowing jellyfish attempting to tangle themselves together in the background as Anna says “while we have the chance,” seem to seal the deal.
Sadly, there are readers who just don’t get it. “Hairychap” weighs in to answer Chris’ inquiry — and fails miserably:
“Sleeping with Anna isn’t taking advantage of a pre-existing relationship established by Peter, heck she never even meet Peter before he was Ock.”
It’s a good thing we don’t live in a world where real body-snatchers or telepaths exist because inevitably it would be populated with “Hairychaps”… Regardless, here are a few reasons for Chris why he hasn’t seen the online furor that was displayed at the start of Superior Spider-Man:
Dan Slott has admitted that he turned Peter Parker into a “meat puppet.” There really isn’t much else to say. At some point Mr. Slott (consciously or unconsciously) decided to come clean. Once a writer says that a character is being used as a “meat puppet,” there’s really nothing left for readers to expose. All they can do is reiterate how awful the editorial decisions on the book are.
Dan Slott makes weirdly veiled legal threats when people who give his work hard-nosed critiques, sends his Twitter followers to block people, and generally throws online tantrums where he proclaims that he’s “done” with the internet and message boards — before coming back hours later. One of my favorite Dan Slott memories is when I started talking about Superior Spider-Man at Comicvine and he decided it was the appropriate time to discuss my writings on … Trayvon Martin.
It’s the holiday season. People are spending time with their family, Christmas shopping and eating good food. Most websites see a dip in traffic this time of year. My guess is that the kind of people who understand the moral bankruptcy of Superior Spider-Man are also the kind of people who check out from online message boards during November-December.
Perhaps Crawlspace might have a problem replying to inquiries regarding its comments section? There is one person who would like to comment on the rape situation over at Crawlspace, but can’t — me. I used to be able to comment there, but on July 22 that stopped. Below is a screenshot of my email to the website. (In full disclosure, I haven’t checked since July since there wasn’t a response to my inquiry.)
Dear Sir,
I’ve been trying to post in your comments section, but have been unable to for some reason. I was wondering if there is a glitch in the system or if I’ve been banned for some sort of breach of etiquette I was unaware of (I haven’t used foul language or attacked other individuals in the comments section).
I tried to comment in both Firefox and Safari and neither of those worked. [Any] insight you can give me would be appreciated. I enjoy your podcasts and updates and would like to comment, if possible.
Best,
Doug
It’s interesting that I never received a reply.
Regardless, the reason why Chris sees less “anxiety” these days is because people are resigned to the fact that Dan Slott has done vast amounts of damage to the Spider-Man brand. They’re really just waiting for the day when a new creative team can come in and pick up the pieces.
How much lower can this title go? I’ll let you know in the months ahead.
In May, I broke down for readers what, exactly, it would mean to have a megalomaniac body-snatching Spider-Man running around in Peter Parker’s body. Dan Slott’s creation, on the cusp of enacting a world-wide Holocaust, in which 6 billion lives were meant to perish, proclaimed he would be a “mass murderer worse than Pol Pot, Hitler, and Genghis Khan combined!” What followed was months of Dan Slott following me around the internet, haranguing me for using that line as a springboard for discussion, as well as using an actual image of the Holocaust in the process.
I asked: What is more offensive: Dan Slott’s indiscriminate use of incendiary names, or my reminder of the implications of his indiscriminate use of incendiary names? I never really received an answer. Is it too early to say “vindicated”?
Because we have seen in the regular title, Spider-Man, now possessed fully by Doc Ock, trying to be a better man. He’s not trying to take over the world, he’s not trying to steal, he is trying to be a superhero. He is vicious, he makes different decisions, he has killed, but he saves people – both those close to him, and large numbers of strangers. His motives are positive, if warped by his previous nature.
In today’s Superior Spider-Man, the character goes a little further. Into full blown Nazi-like torture/experimentation on his victims. By ripping out teeth and fingernails…
How will Dan Slott react?
This is the “Spider-Man” Marvel gives readers in 2013.
This is Dan Slott’s creation. We reap what we sow.
There are moment’s in a man’s life where he says something that gives us a glimpse into his soul. Dan Slott’s Doctor Octopus — moments from wiping out humanity — did such a thing. Dan Slott put the words into his mouth. Now, even Bleeding Cool is acknowledging that a character who tortures his victims by pulling out their fingernails and teeth does, indeed, have quite a bit in common with the Nazis. Superior Spider-Man? More like Dan Slott’s Frankenstein. And no amount of feigned outrage by Dan Slott regarding the memories of his ancestors can change that.
Given one of the most iconic characters of all time, Dan Slott honors his ancestors by creating a “Spider-Man” who tortures his victims in the name of “science.” Telling.
Dark Elves, monsters and Tom Hiddleston as Loki in ‘Thor: The Dark World’ — what can go wrong? Not much, really. Audiences seem to agree:
Marvel Studios and Disney’s Thor: The Dark World thundered its way to a $86.1 million domestic launch as it continued its global assault, finishing the weekend with a sizeable $327 million in worldwide ticket sales.
That’s an impressive start considering the first Thor, which debuted to $65.7 million domestically in May 2011, grossed $449.3 million globally in all. The sequel nabbed one of the top November openings of all time in North America, although it couldn’t quite match the $88.4 million earned by Skyfall on the same weekend a year ago.
Marvel Studios is making it look easy at this point, which is rather impressive given the number of moving parts each of these films have. Kevin Feige, President of Production at Marvel Studios, must be eating his Cheerios or Wheaties over the last couple of years, because his job performance has been strong.
Anyone who goes to ‘Thor: The Dark World’ looking for a complex plot will be disappointed: Creatures of darkness want to fill all of existence filled with darkness. Thor must stop them. He does. The end.
Those who are looking for a little action, a little adventure, a helping of humor and a good dose of Tom Hiddleston’s Loki making everything he touches awesome will be pleased. Adopted kid who has all sorts of issues with mother, father and brother constantly plots and plans ways to show that he loves them — and hates them — to death. The end.
Chris Hemsworth does a fine job as Thor — he looks the part, is believably noble and worthy of Mjolnir — but it’s the nature of his relationship with his adopted brother Loki that makes the trek to the movie theater worth it. Hiddleston, in many ways, is the glue that holds the whole thing together. Without him, ‘The Dark World’ becomes an exponentially duller film. It may seem sad that, in his own movie, Thor needs Loki in order to achieve his full box-office potential, but is it really? You can’t have Yin without Yang, and you can’t fully appreciate Thor’s honor without holding him up to the actions of his mischievous brother.
At one point in ‘The Dark World’ Thor says, “Mother wouldn’t want us to fight.” Loki’s response: ” But she wouldn’t be that surprised.” Note to Thor: moviegoers want you to fight. We like when the anger and the jealously and the sibling rivalry plays out on screen because in our own mini-Asgards we deal with it every day. Do we overcome the pettiness and achieve great things, or do we give into our darker half and do as Loki would? If we see ourselves as manipulators, do we manipulate to serve our own selfish ends, or do we manipulate others so that they might soar? Seeing that struggle as depicted by Hiddleston is what elevates Marvel’s second Thor movie from “I’ll wait until it’s on Netflix” to “I’ll be there opening weekend sitting one row behind the girl with the Thor outfit on.”
If you’re looking for a fun “popcorn” movie to see this November, make a trip to see Thor’s second solo movie. If you want to see something that is critically acclaimed that doesn’t lend itself to carelessly flicking popcorn into your mouth, see “12 years a slave.”
Note: To the person who sees Marvel movies and then continues to leave as soon as the end credits begin to roll, I have a question for you: Why? You know you’re not supposed to, but you do it anyway. I say this out of love: Get with the program, already.
Marvel comics has some interesting priorities. It allowed Dan Slott to kill one of the most popular characters of all time — Peter Parker — and has been dragging its feet on bringing him back ever since. It recently announced an embarrassing new origin for Tony Stark. Tens-of-thousands of long time readers might be livid, but Marvel wants you to know that it’s all going to be okay because this February they’ll be introducing … a Muslim superhero who has the ability to look a lot like “Cock Knocker” from Kevin Smith’s ‘Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back’? Weird.
Marvel announced to the New York Times that G Willow Wilson (writer of the short-lived revival of the Crossgen series Mystic) will be writing a new Ms. Marvel series starring Kamala Khan, a Muslim American teenage girl with the ability to shapeshift. According to the Times, Khan idolizes Carol Danvers and takes up her original codename after discovering her powers.
Okay. Fair enough. Marvel gets to put out a press release and pat itself on the back for being “diverse.” Sure. But questions remain: Is this going to be a book on how all Americans are apparently fearful of Muslims, or will the superhero use her powers to save Muslims like Malala Yousafzai before they’re shot in the face and left for dead by Pakistani Taliban psychopaths? Or, will the book primarily just be about the struggles of a teenage girl?
Kamala will face struggles outside her own head, including conflicts close to home. “Her brother is extremely conservative,” [Marvel editor] Ms. Amanat said. “Her mom is paranoid that she’s going to touch a boy and get pregnant. Her father wants her to concentrate on her studies and become a doctor.” Next to those challenges, fighting supervillains may be a respite.
The creative team is braced for all possible reactions. “I do expect some negativity,” Ms. Amanat said, “not only from people who are anti-Muslim, but people who are Muslim and might want the character portrayed in a particular light.”
But “this is not evangelism,” Ms. Wilson said. “It was really important for me to portray Kamala as someone who is struggling with her faith.” The series, Ms. Wilson said, would deal with how familial and religious edicts mesh with super-heroics, which can require rules to be broken.
It’s really hard to comment on the book before it’s come out. I want to give Marvel the benefit of the doubt, but how can I? History indicates that they’ll go the politically correct route. Remember when Marvel wanted Spider-Man readers to know that Muslims are safer in Iran than New York? I do.
Let me set the stage. Something is very wrong in New York City. Citizens have been taken with fear, and they’re acting out in irrational ways. Spider-Man is working overtime (what else is new?) to keep the city from tearing itself apart. Cue Naveed Moshtaghi, a taxi driver and Iranian immigrant. Naveed’s vehicle is hit by an angry white guy, who then blames the accident on Naveed: ”He’s one of the terrorists. He wants to kill us all!”, says the aggressor. A mob is swarms around Naveed, swallowing him whole until Spider-Man saves the day.
At this point I’m willing to give writer Chris Yost a break. Maybe the “God of Fear” is really behind it all. I’m even willing to shrug off a narrator who begins, “Naveed Moshtaghi is afraid of the same thing he’s been afraid of for ten years,” (i.e., Americans are just itching for an excuse to bum rush Muslims post-9/11 to infinity and beyond), right before the story unfolds that way.
But then something interesting happens. All alone on a rooftop, Spider-Man tells the man he’s dealing with the crisis very well. Naveed responds: “I’m a second generation Iranian in New York City. Living in fear, that’s what I’m used to. What is happening down there, sometimes I think it was only a matter of time.”
Regardless, the point is, Marvel wonders why fans roll their eyes every time there is a new character seemingly invented for the sole purpose of throwing a diversity parade. Usually, those creations have less to do with adding an interesting new personality to the universe and more to do with beating readers over the head with a particular worldview. Don’t believe me? See DC’s Muslim Green Lantern.
Will I check out Ms. Marvel when it hits shelves? Perhaps. Although, quite honestly, it seems as though Marvel should get right with Spider-Man and Iron Man fans before it starts asking readers to fork over cash for teenage shapeshifters.
The New York Comic Con is on, which means that comic fans get to view internet photo galleries of beautiful Cosplay ladies dressed as Power Girl, and Peter Parker fans get to read Dan Slott interviews where he inadvertently telegraphs to the world what he really thinks of the character.
Caps-lock abusing Dan teased things to come for Superior Spider-Man this weekend, and his state of mind couldn’t be clearer. ‘The Superior Freaky Friday Spider-Man’ takes on the Green Goblin in the months ahead, but before they clash Dan Slott wanted to set the record straight for posterity: He is the guy whose editorial judgment was so sound he decided to let a megalomaniac use Peter Parker as a “meat puppet.”
CBR: We know what the Green Goblin meant to Peter Parker, but what does he mean to Otto Octavius?
Dan Slott: I don’t want to give stuff away. You’ll have to wait and see, but one thing to keep in mind is Doc Ock killed Spider-Man, took his life, and carried on. So he’s had the ultimate victory over Spider-Man.
When you look at the rankings, I’m sorry but everything he’s done from the “Dying Wish” arc of “Amazing Spider-Man” on moves him up in the rankings. Norman Osborn is like, “Ha! I threw your girlfriend off a bridge.” And Dock Ock could reply, “You know what? I RIPPED HIS BRAIN OUT OF HIS SKULL, PUT MY MIND INSIDE, AND WORE HIM LIKE A MEAT PUPPET! TOP THAT!” [Laughs] So at some point you go, “You know, I think Doc Ock might just be the #1 Spider-Man villain of all time.” It’s like, “Suck it Goblin!”
Slow clap for Dan Slott. He is actually proud of allowing Peter Parker to be treated like a “meat puppet.” If you take to blogs, twitter and other comic forums to voice displeasure with his Peter Parker meat puppetry, he mocks you. Question for long time Peter Parker fans: Did you ever think things would reach this point?
How do you top that? In Dan Slott’s mind, one would assume that making Peter Parker into The Green Goblin might be an option. There are probably all sorts of dastardly things one could do to Aunt May that could “top” it, but do we really want to go there? Anti-heroes are still, on some level, supposed to be heroes, and if Dan Slott thinks Doc Ock can exist as one in Peter Parker’s body for such an extended period of time, what now constitutes a villain?
Read the full interview and you can’t help but notice that Mr. Slott seems to have concluded that if he can’t generate sales by uniting all Spider-Man fans (those who love Peter Parker and those who really just want to see someone in the costume swinging around the city with spider-powers), he’ll do so by creating events that a.) have far-reaching implications for the entire Marvel Universe, and b.) tormenting readers. People filled with anger and people filled with inspiration can be moved to action, but it is much easier to upset readers than to uplift them — hence, Superior Spider-Man.
Again, the question becomes: Where do you go from here? At some point in time Peter Parker will have to come back, and a poor writer will have to figure out a way to undo the damage. Dan Slott’s work on Spider-Man is reminiscent of the woman who tried to restore a 19th-century fresco of Jesus and turned it into an abomination. The finished product isn’t popular because it is beautiful, but because it is so incredibly weird and bizarre.
Dan Slott is the Celia Gimenez of the comic book industry, even if he doesn’t realize it yet.
Dan Slott’s work on Spider-Man can be compared to the Spanish woman who took the 19th-century fresco of Jesus (Ecce Homo or Behold the Man) and turned it into something so strange people had to notice. How will anyone return the fresco to its original beauty? How will a writer return Peter Parker to his rightful place of glory in the Marvel Universe?
If you are a fan of Peter Parker, I high suggest taking to social media platforms to let your voice be heard. There are few comic book characters that can be considered American cultural icons, but Peter Parker is one of them. When the history books are recorded, it should be a mark of shame upon the creative team that allowed him to be treated like a “meat puppet.”
Superior Spider-Man writer Dan Slott has a reputation for not taking criticism well. His online behavior is well known, but now that he has issued marching orders to his followers like Mole Man to his troops, I will calmly and coolly dismantle his online rant for posterity.
An online critic is trying to weasel out of the time he implied that I (a Jew) was adding an antiSemitic element to my book.
Actually, no, I’m not. I’ve always been right here. The problem is that Dan Slott has never commented on my blog, sent me a direct message or asked for my email address to discuss his grievance. Instead, he’s followed me around the Internet demanding that I talk to him to about a blog post I wrote in May titled: Is Dan Slott’s ‘Superior Spider-Man’ really a Superior anti-Semite?
In Dan Slott’s mind, analyzing a character who wanted to transcend Hitler, Pol Pot and Ghengis Khan in terms of evil perpetrated upon the world is the same thing as accusing or implying Dan Slott of being anti-Semetic (as if I knew or even cared about his heritage before he brought it up). Reasonable people can separate the two, but Dan Slott can’t. What Dan Slott doesn’t get — in some sense because moral relativism has warped his mind — is that it doesn’t matter what his intentions are if the end result is that a monster worse than Hitler is in Peter Parker’s body.
His first attempt today: Why was I still talking about it? It was “months ago.”
Seriously, why am I so upset that he took one word balloon out of context and built up an entire FALSE blog entry about it? In his mind It shouldn’t matter to me that he ran that REPREHENSIBLE piece and then punctuated his point with a picture of Jewish remains being removed from a concentration camp oven.
Dan Slott was the one who made Doc Ock say he wanted to transcend Hitler, Pol Pot and Khan — at the exact moment he was on the brink of causing an extinction-level event. Not me. That context is important. There are certain critical moments in history where a man says something that reveals his true character. Doctor Octopus did just that as six billion lives were on the cusp of experiencing the apocalypse, and I wrote about it. I’m sorry if Dan Slott doesn’t like it, or if deep down he knows I’m right.
C’mon. I should drop it. Even though the article is STILL up at his site and he has NEVER apologized for it.
Dan Slott’s demand for an apology is based on the false premise that I thought or wanted people to think he was an anti-Semite.
His latest attempt today: The title of his blog raised a QUESTION. It ended in a question mark. It didn’t say I was promoting antiSemitism in a comic book. It only ASKED if I was. Therefore… It’s okay. I mean, don’t we live in a society where anyone is free to broach ANY question?
I don’t think he understands what the word “implying” means.
Poor Dan, the title was posed as a question — and then I answered the question: “Otto didn’t want to kill millions of Jews — he “merely” wanted to kill six billion people, which would just so happen to include all the Jews. Silly me.The guy who “just” came within inches of an extinction level event because he hated all of humanityis now housed in Peter Parker’s body.”
Yes, it’s pretty clear to everyone but Dan Slott what I did. He just doesn’t like it, so instead he’ll follow me around the internet demanding that I apologize to him. He’ll make it personal by invoking his Jewish faith over and over, and when a moderator doesn’t like what he’s done Mr. Slott will sic his 39K Twitter followers on me.
That blog entry, with the one word balloon taken out of context, the bizarre semantic gymnastics he makes to posit his “question,” and the graphic photo of the remnants of people I share ancestry with being shoveled out of an oven in Dachau– was put together by this unscrupulous person for NO other reason than TO imply I had antiSemitic leanings.
Again, I never did that. “Semantic gymnastics” is Dan Slott’s euphemism for “writing that doesn’t lend itself to Dan Slott’s personal attacks.”
The point of the piece was to show that Dan Slott’s “anti-hero” is in fact a monster worse than Hitler, Pol Pot and Khan. Want proof he doesn’t get it? Dan Slott used a Newsarama interview to compare a character who almost wiped out the entire earth to … Hawkeye.
“At his core, he’s someone we don’t really think of as heroic. But is he any more annoying than [former villain] Hawkeye used to be?” (Dan Slott).
That is how steeped in moral relativism Dan Slott is.
He used Godwin’s Law, the laziest and most offensive “debate” tactic, to compare someone you don’t like to Hitler & the Nazis. Why? Because he’s upset over Spider-Man comic books. IT’S SHAMEFUL. And to try to semantically weasel out of it is DOUBLY SHAMEFUL.
What is more offensive: Dan Slott’s indiscriminate use of incendiary names or my reminder of the implications of his indiscriminate use of incendiary names?
Dan Slott drops the Hitler card in his comic book as a throwaway line, and then gets upset when someone doesn’t take it as a throwaway line. Dan Slott takes his Jewish ancestry seriously, and yet he just casually has Otto say he wants to transcend three of the most reviled men in history? Interesting…
If you follow my feed and wish to show support, please block @douglasernst. And please do not give his blog ANY hits.
If you follow @douglasernst and are offended by this entry, please let me know so I can block you. I don’t want anything to do with anyone who feels fine supporting a person who would do this, leave it up on his site for months– and worse– try to walk it off as nothing wrong.
The internet can be a wonderful tool for meeting people around the world and sharing thoughts and experiences with them. It can also be a way to spread hate and distortions.
Hate? Dan Slott has called me “a bad person” multiple times now. I generally reserve that term for people who abuse their children, rape women and murder people. You know … guys like Hitler. Dan Slott? His moral relativism allows him to put me in the “bad person” category with the rest of them because I wrote a blog post he disagrees with.
Using Dan Slott’s logic, I should go ballistic on all of my friends over the years who have made Catholic jokes. My faith is incredibly important to me, but yet I don’t go around calling people “bad” because they occasionally jabbed at a part of me that I hold dear. I deal with it like an adult. He should try it sometime.
One of my most prized possessions are antique clay pipes from Masada that my uncle, a rabbi, gave me for my Bar Mitzvah. I may not be a diligent or observant Jew as an adult, but I look at those pipes and it reminds me that for the grace of my ancestors overcoming great hardships and prejudices, neither I nor my family would be here today.
That’s touching, but it does nothing to change the fact that one of the most iconic superheroes ever is now a character who wanted to exterminate humanity.
The thought of someone trying to tarnish my reputation by DISTORTING one line of dialogue I’d written– and using it to portray me as someone who would promote antiSemitism SICKENS me. The fact that same person won’t own up to it– and worse– would try to rationalize it away– just fills me with sorrow that someone who could do that even exists. And when it’s all done to score internet-points over a comic book? That just makes it even more pathetic.
Sad? Dan Slott doesn’t realize that a comic book can be much more than a comic book. When I was a kid my brother let me read ‘Maus’ by Art Spiegelman. I suggest giving it a read right now if you’ve never heard of it. Mr. Spiegelman — unlike Dan Slott — would never have Doctor Octopus just casually mention Hitler in one line of dialogue. If Doctor Octopus was moments away from exterminating all of humanity and he uttered Hitler’s name, it would mean something. Every word would be there for a reason.
Dan Slott doesn’t feel sickness and sorrow because I’m wrong; he feels those things because the truth can cut deep. Every word is precious to a good writer, and “one line of dialogue” is never just “one line of dialogue.” It is not my fault that Mr. Slott chose to use Hitler’s name in such a careless and haphazard manner if his ancestry is that important to him.
I’m taking an internet break for a while and talking to real people– people I can look in the eye. Sorry for the long vent. Had to get that off my chest.
Cathartic, isn’t it Mr. Slott? It’s kind of like someone venting after a writer kills off one of the most culturally significant comic book characters of all time and replaces him with a megalomaniac.
Here’s a screenshot of Dan’s tweet to his 39K followers with his re-tweet of my blog entry, which has since been deleted. Here’s the rub: the internet is forever.
And finally:
Dan Slott chases people around the internet, demanding they apologize to him for perceived slights, and never stops to think that maybe (just maybe) the notes he writes to himself are subconscious attempts to clue him in on some serious projection issues.
Now Dan’s fans are taking a cue from him, where they can attack me over at Comic Vine because they don’t want to come here. You’d think if a guy was going to go to all the trouble to Photoshop my name into a panel, then he’d at least spell my name correctly. ‘Doulas’? Seriously?
The poor guy couldn’t even spell ‘Douglas’ in his little personal attack panel that he posted at Comic Vine. Sad.
Douglas Ernst Blog 