Peter Parker – Page 12 – Douglas Ernst Blog

Dan Slott’s moral relativism killed Spider-Man: One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter

April 6, 2013April 12, 2017by Douglas Ernst35 Comments

Imagine if you will, a scenario where a thin-skinned comic book writer goes off on a tirade laced with ad hominem attacks on blogger who was simply putting forth a straight-forward critique of his work. Imagine that online outburst setting off a chain of events in which another fan ends up introducing the blogger to a Newsarama interview he was unfamiliar with. The reader says he’d like to see a response to the interview. Does the blogger do it?

Well imagine no longer, because that blogger is me and I intend to do address the issue. The Newsarama interview, in short, perfectly embodies everything that is wrong with Dan Slott’s approach to Spider-Man. As I did in my last piece, I will break it up into smaller sections so readers can see the two different visions side by side.

Nrama: With Superior Spider-Man, you’re writing Doc Ock as a lead character for really the first time, and a more long-term Doc Ock story than has really been seen before. We’re seeing the character put in very different situations, interacting with totally different characters. What kind of task has that been — approaching his mindset and his attitude in the position of a lead character?

Slott: He’s trying his best to be a hero, but he’s doing it in a very Doc Ock way. And Doc Ock’s an egotistical, annoying sh*t. It makes him an interesting character. At his core, he’s someone we don’t really think of heroic. But is he any more annoying than [former villain] Hawkeye used to be?

Forgive me if I’m wrong, but did Hawkeye ever try and put in motion plans to bring about an extinction-level event? If I missed that one, can someone let me know the issue so I can read it tomorrow? I would say that trying to incinerate 6 billion people is slightly more “annoying” than anything Hawkeye could ever dish out.

Slott: Also, when you look at Doc Ock, he was so much like Peter Parker. Peter Parker, if he didn’t know the lessons of power and responsibility, that teenage nerd would have grown up to be an Otto Octavius nerd, with the same kind of, “I’m going to make them pay.” This is the flip of that. This is Doc Ock getting to go back in time and be as young as Peter Parker, and have force-fed into him this sense of power and responsibility. He has that lesson from Uncle Ben in his core. That was Peter Parker’s parting gift to the world — I’m not going to leave the world a villain, I’m going to leave them a hero.

Peter Parker’s “gift” (i.e., Dan Slott’s “gift”) to the world was that he has allowed a character who should be serving 5,000 life sentences for crimes against humanity off the hook. Before redemption can occur on earth a man must pay for his crimes and atone for his sins. Doc Ock has the blood of countless innocents on his hands, but because Peter beamed “with great power comes great responsibility” into the villain’s head moments before he died then it’s somehow all okay? Of course not. And that’s why this current run is so repulsive to anyone with a shred of respect for the character; they would never allow Doctor Octopus to take up the mantle of Spider-Man.

Slott: Doc never intended to be on this path, and in his own way he’s very good at it. He’s just doing it differently than Peter would.

Do you see Punisher as a hero? Do you see Wolverine as a hero? If these guys can be heroes, why can’t Doc Ock?

And this is where the moral relativist in Dan Slott exposes himself for all the world to see. It’s the “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter” mentality. One man’s Spider-Man is another man’s Doc Ock. One man’s Captain America is another man’s Red Skull. It’s sick.

Since when has the core of Wolverine’s or the Punisher’s character ever been about wanton destruction, innocents be damned? When have they ever took it upon themselves to devise plots and plans that would see countless men, women and innocent children blown to bits?

Do Wolverine and Punisher push the definition of what it means to be a hero to its limits? Yes. But reasonable people know that if they were ever tried and convicted in a court of law for taking matters into their own hands (e.g., tracking down a drug lord and killing him in his sleep) that is the price one must pay for dishing out vigilante justice.

That aside, the philosophical gap between Wolverine and Doctor Octopus is so enormous that to even ask why one can be a hero and the other can’t is ludicrous. When anyone can be a hero — despite a lifetime of evil they have not answered for— then we might as well all be villains.

Slott: Here’s someone as evil as Massacre — if Spider-Man had just captured him and webbed him up, he’d be out six months from now, doing this again. Yeah, sure he was helpless, and his wrist was snapped, and disarmed, but, “If I shoot him in the head, I’ve saved 30 people in the future.” Doc Ock can look at it almost as a math equation, and be very happy with himself, and sleep well at night knowing what he did. For him, that’s power and responsibility.

Again, unless the hero is on a battlefield or working on behalf of a sovereign nation to mitigate threats to national security, the discretion he has as it pertains to the use of deadly force is severely constrained. Cases like Massacre’s are what the criminal justice system is for. Maybe in the Marvel Universe citizens are so dumb that they have done away with the death penalty — I don’t know. But from what I gather, a justice system exists, and a real hero would attempt to work within the confines of the system as much as possible, given how difficult it would be in a world where Galactus could show up at a moment’s notice.

Given that Dan Slott’s Superior Spider-Man simply runs numbers in his head to determine whether or not he’s doing the right thing or not, what would stop him from wiping out an entire city of innocents to “save” lives? Perhaps one day the ‘Superior Spider-Man’ will go all evil Al Gore (is that redundant?) and determine that the only way to stave off global warming is to wipe out Los Angeles, New York and Chicago. If you torture numbers long enough they’ll tell you anything you want to hear, and Dan Slott’s own concept of what a “hero” is allows for megalomaniacs like Doctor Octopus to enter the tent.

Nrama: It might be too probably reading too much into it, but with the cutaway, and only Captain America out and out saying that Spidey killed Massacre, is he definitely dead, or is there some deliberate ambiguity there?

Remember a few years ago, during Marvel’s weird Bush-allegory, whereas the Civil War story line and the events surrounding the Superhero Registration Act gave readers their daily does of social commentary on the Patriot Act? I do. Captain America was fighting for the “rights” of the guy who could walk into his neighbor’s house on a daily basis, rape his wife and kids in front of them, and then mind-wipe the family so no one remembered the gruesome crimes took place.

What does that have to do with Superior Spider-Man? Quite a bit, actually. The liberalism that worked it’s way in to a Marvel event, in such a way that Captain America would be so insane as to oppose a federal registry of citizens in the U.S. with the power to alter space and time, is the same liberalism that allows allows Dan Slott to wonder why Doctor Octopus can’t be a hero — merely months after the character came within inches of triggering the apocalypse.

Slott: Massacre’s dead. I think what people are reading as ambiguous is what we can show you in a Spider-Man comic. We can’t show you brain matter shooting out of the back of a head. … With Massacre we can look at it, and go, “He just saved a lot of lives.”

And with Superior Spider-Man, Marvel is hemorrhaging tens-of-thousands of fans who would be happy to buy a Spider-Man book, if only the men in charge weren’t so morally confused that they would redefine the word ‘hero’ until it permitted Peter Parker to make a deal with the devil and for Doctor Octopus to ultimately don the true hero’s mask.

There’s only one word left to describe the state of Spider-Man today: Sad.

Update: Newsrama has seemingly blocked me from commenting on a blog about … me. I guess when you tactfully defend yourself you’re a troll. Or perhaps if you make Dan Slott look bad the powers that be cut you off. That happens when you’re friends with the writer.

This is why blogs are so important. They can not shut you up on your own blog. Marvel did the very same thing during OMD/BND to anyone who made “the brain trust” look bad. If you’re upset with the status quo, start your own blog.

Also, my traffic spiked again. As usual, that meant that Dan Slott was sending people off to Google search until they found me. But here’s the catch: I did not tweet the story, share it on Tumblr or post it to Facebook or any other social media platform. So that means Dan Slott kept tabs on me or was weirdly looking for stories about himself — and then had the nerve to call me crazy. Remember when he stalked “The Main Event”? I do.

Dan Slott stalked 'The Main Event'. Last night, I posted this piece, but did not share it on Twitter, Tumblr or any other social media platforms. — Dan Slott stalked ‘The Main Event’. Last night I posted this piece, but did not share it on Twitter, Tumblr or any other social media platforms. Slott obviously was keeping tabs on this site or weirdly looking for stories about himself, and then he has the nerve to call me crazy.

Dan Slott goes nuts over sales because he knows Spider-Man fans don’t respect him

April 3, 2013December 27, 2015by Douglas Ernst174 Comments

Dan Slott Captain America shirt — In one corner we have Dan Slott, who thinks that typing insults and using all-caps gives his assertions more validity. In the other we have a comic fan who is willing to debate the issues and stay on point. Is it any wonder why Dan Slott only insults “conservative bloggers” from a distance?

There’s an old saying that goes something like this: “He who thinks one man can’t be effective has never slept in bed with a mosquito.” And so, it is with that mentality that I blog away, whether it’s something as important as exposing the truth behind North Korean gulags or the small stuff like Dan Slott’s treatment of American icons like Spider-Man.

Dan Slott has referred to me multiple times in his Twitter feed, although never by name. It’s always been, pejoratively, “conservative blogger.” And yesterday, after pointing out that everyone but Dan Slott knows Superior Spider-Man is inferior to Amazing Spider-Man, he upped the ante with an extended rant — again not tagging me in the tweet or even linking back to the original post.

Yes, according to Dan, I am an “idiot.” If that’s the case, why would he go off on such a diatribe? And why would he shy away from exposing me as an idiot for all to see on my very own blog? Nothing would be sweeter than to once-and-for-all put that ‘idiot conservative blogger’ in his place, right?

The reason why Dan Slott throws out ad hominem attacks from afar with me is because he knows I’ll tear him to shreds.

So now, I will deconstruct Dan’s drivel for all the world to see — and invite him to exchange in a lively debate in the comments section, where he can pummel me to the ground like Doc Ock in command of Peter’s body.

Dear Conservative Blogger who was upset that Peter Parker/Spider-Man
saved North Korean soldiers instead of LEAVING THEM TO DIE– BECAUSE
HE REVERED ALL LIFE…

False. As I discussed before, the reason why I was upset was that with 6 billion lives on the line, Dan Slott’s Peter Parker took precious time — when every second counted — to lecture his teammates about the sanctity of North Korea’s gulag overseers. Yes, that same North Korean regime that is now threatening to nuke the United States.

My point was that Spider-Man enters war zones, and then refuses to act like a solider because the truth is, sometimes you have to take a life in order to save a life. Or in Spider-Man’s case, six billion. That is real life. That is what law enforcement agencies and soldiers must deal with every day. And that is the kind of moral conundrum that would make for an interesting Spider-Man story, instead of the half-baked ideas Dan Slott dishes out on a regular basis.

Dear Same-Conservative-Blogger who is NOW upset that Otto
Octavius/Spider-Man took out a crazed gunman who killed over 30 people
in a shooting INSTEAD of letting the police cart him away to prison–
BECAUSE Otto thought that man (even though helpless at the time)
deserved to die, might later get out, and kill again…

False. Again, there is a difference between a murderer on the streets of New York — who is due his day in court by a trial of his peers — and the combatant on a battlefield, who does not have the same constitutional rights granted to Americans. Now that it’s obvious that Dan Slott doesn’t know the difference between the two, we can better understand why Marvel spent time sending Captain America after the Tea Party instead of Taliban head-choppers in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

You are an IDIOT.

No, Dan — you appear to be the one without the intellectual chops, as has been demonstrated above. I have calmly shown how the only way you appear remotely intelligent is by misrepresenting what I say on a platform where your drones can not compare our arguments side by side. To top it all off, the only way I know you’re talking about me is because those very same drones are Googling my work, which shows up in my Wordress statistics when they finally land on the site.

I’m not saying that BECAUSE you are a Conservative Blogger.

Everyone is entitled to their own political beliefs.

I’m saying that BECAUSE you, specifically– independent of the fact
you’re a Conservative Blogger– ARE an idiot.

When someone’s beliefs/ideologies/presuppositions BLIND them to their
own hypocrisies– WHEREVER those beliefs/ideologies/presuppositions
lie– CONSERVATIVE, LIBERAL, or WHAT-HAVE-YOU– THOSE PEOPLE (like
yourself) ARE COMPLETE AND UTTER IDIOTS.

Congratulations.

It says something about a guy who thinks because he writes the word ‘idiot’ multiple times and abuses the Caps Lock key that what he’s saying must be true.

You are NOT a rational, thinking human being. You’re an idiot who’s
had their brain removed and filled with the
pap/preconceived-notions/rhetoric/propaganda/talking-points of others.

There is no talking, conversing, or reasoning with you. Enjoy your
idiocy by yourself and those stupid enough to endure it, you brain
dead ideologue.

Again, Dan’s argument boils down to: “idiot-idiot-idiot-idiot-stupid-brain dead.” And yet, I’m supposedly the one who is “not rational”? Good one, Dan.

But it isn’t until the end that we see what really gets Dan’s goat:

And, BTW, it DOESN’T matter how many copies of SUPERIOR SPIDER-MAN are
on the racks of your Barnes & Noble in Lynchburg, Virginia. The book
is doing PHENOMENALLY well.

How does one define “phenomenally well”? (I’m sorry if I don’t use all-caps like Dan. I understand that typing in big letters doesn’t magically give my point more validity.) If we’re talking about the tens-of-thousands of readers like me, who flip through Marvel comics these days only to put them back on the shelf to buy frozen yogurt, then I wouldn’t call that phenomenal. I still buy comics — just rarely anything Marvel.

It works like this: It’s a TOP 10 BOOK– one of Marvel’s BEST
performing titles– hell, one of the BEST performing titles in the
ENTIRE AMERICAN MARKET! Google the sales. THEN, once you see how it’s
ACTUALLY doing nationwide, factor THIS in: EVERY SINGLE ISSUE HAS SOLD
OUT ON THE DISTRIBUTOR LEVEL AND GONE BACK FOR MULTIPLE PRINTINGS– ON
TOP OF THOSE NUMBERS!

What does THAT mean? That means that LOTS of readers ACROSS the
country are buying enough copies that enough retailers are SELLING OUT
and having to place REORDERS– and that those REORDERS are eating
through whatever stock Diamond has. Not all books sell out. SUPERIOR
SPIDER-MAN does. So even though you’d like to paint its sales as “not
superior,” you would be DEMONSTRATIVELY WRONG. IN A VERY EASY TO PROVE
WAY.

Not once in my post did I make an argument for sales of Superior Spider-Man on a national or even a regional level. In fact, 95 percent of my post was about how Slott misses the boat when it comes to telling a compelling story. It has almost nothing to do with sales, except for one sentence about sales in Lynchburg, Va., specifically. Could I have talked about the comic shops in and around Washington, DC — where I actually live? Yes. Could I have talked about The Main Event’s take down of Slott and his on-the-ground experience with large comic shops in Philly? Yes. But I didn’t do that.

Congratulations Dan, for inventing a case I never made about sales and then putting me in my place for it. Here’s what I said:

The bottom line is this: After six issues of the Superior Spider-Man, it is more apparent than ever that the decision to kill off The Amazing Spider-Man in the manner Mr. Slott did was not worth the cost in good will towards Marvel. For every interesting morsel readers are given to chew on, there are mouthfuls of spoiled stale ideas that remind them why “Superior” is vastly inferior to its predecessor.

This morning, a Twitter follower read my post and told me to check out Marvel’s press release for Superior Spider-Man #9. It reads in part: “The hottest comic in comics comes to a turning point that will get you angrier than you were after Spidey #700!” (emphasis added).

Again, Dan Slott’s entire run is fueled on anger. It seems as though everything Marvel has done with Spider-Man over the past handful of years has been predicated on channeling anger to motivate people instead of love for one of the greatest comic book characters ever. And that’s what’s so sad, because it doesn’t have to be that way.

It’s okay to have your own opinions. It’s not okay to make up your own
“facts.” Especially when you’re drawing gross assumptions from small
and biased samplings.

This is coming from a guy who took me to task on a sales argument I never made in the blog post he was referencing.

Also, idiot, no rape took place in the pages of Superior Spider-Man.
And the OTHER idiot who lead you to believe that– the guy who writes
Aunt May fan-fic porn, commissions naked pictures of MaryJane Watson
art from people on DeviantArt, and makes bogus sales charts for
Amazing Spider-Man while purposefully leaving off the TOP THIRD of all
the (inaccurate) data he can find? The SAME idiot who created the
#SuperiorSpiderRapist hash tag? The SAME idiot who tweeted well into
the triple digits how MJ would DEFINITELY be raped in the pages of the
book? Even THAT idiot came out and admitted that he was WRONG and that
no physical rape took place. So congrats on keeping THAT
misinformation flowing, you idiot.

Aaaaand rant over. 😀

Notice how Dan Slott got all Clinton-esque, there? No “physical rape” took place. But we all know that the Superior Spider-Man is for all intents and purposes a wannabe rapist. There’s really no way around it. So instead of actually talking about what it would mean to have Doc Ock misrepresent himself to Mary Jane while trying to get in her pants, Dan Slott tries to insinuate that I somehow frequent fan fiction websites that dabble in Spidey porn.

No dice, Dan. And no amount of all caps or emoticons or ‘idiot’ references can hide the fact that unless you’re attacking me from afar I will nail you to the wall.

If Superior Spider-Man is such a hit, why does Dan Slott scour the internet like he was Scott Bakula in Quantum Leap, trying to right the wrongs of “idiots” like me? He wouldn’t, unless he knew that all the sales in the world won’t translate into respect. That’s why he must use ‘conservative’ as a pejorative instead of referring to me by name. That’s why he resorts to ad hominem attacks. That’s why he lashes out. In the end, all he has left is a desperate attempt to rob his critics of their legitimacy, even if it’s through infantile “rants” that end in smiley faces.

Newsflash: It’s not working.

I bought countless issues of Amazing Spider-Man out of sheer morbid curiosity and at times anger before I gave up on Marvel. And there are many others like me out there. Would Dan Slott like me to run through some of the incredibly crappy titles from the early 90’s that sold more copies than the “Top 10” books in 2013, just to show you how far the industry has fallen?

The real measure of “success” for any creator is what the fans will say about him after he’s gone. And Dan Slott knows that he is seen by throngs of fans as a petulant man-boy who doesn’t take criticism well. Taking to Twitter to call people “idiots” instead of having a measured discussion doesn’t help his case any.

Update: Newsrama has seemingly blocked me from commenting on a blog about … me. I guess when you tactfully defend yourself you’re a troll. Or perhaps if you make Dan Slott look bad the powers that be cut you off. That happens when you’re friends with the writer.

If you thought something was so stupid you had to vent about it on Twitter, wouldn't you direct your followers to it? Of course. That is, unless you know deep down that the object of your anger is actually rather intelligent and capable of drawing intellectual blood. — If you thought something was so stupid you had to vent about it on Twitter, wouldn’t you direct your followers to it? Of course. That is, unless you know deep down that the object of your anger is rather nimble and capable of drawing intellectual blood.

Superior Spider-Man: Everyone but Dan Slott knows it’s inferior to its predecessor

April 3, 2013July 30, 2013by Douglas Ernst20 Comments

It was only months ago that Marvel and Dan Slott gave Amazing Spider-Man fans a radioactive middle finger by giving the iconic character a send off only a villain could love.

As Dan Slott explained to CNN at the time:

For all intents and purposes, [Otto] was the adult Peter could have become, Spider-Man’s dark reflection. So what if we flipped it? What if we gave him a second chance? Peter’s final, heroic act was giving Doc all the memories and experiences that kept him on the right path. But is that enough? Can that overcome Ock’s true nature? (Dan Slott)

The answer is clearly no.

Over Easter weekend my wife and I went to Barnes and Noble for coffee and there were two months’ worth of Superior Spider-Man sitting on the shelves. Apparently, sales are not so “superior” in Lynchburg, Va. And so, I did a quick read, got what I needed to write a review and saved myself roughly $10 — which I promptly spent on Sweet Frog frozen yogurt.

Issues 5 and 6 of Superior show once again why liberal guys like Dan Slott often drop the ball when it comes to weaving a thought-provoking Spider-Man tale. Let us consider the evidence:

1. In Massacre, the audience has a character who has committed mass murder in the past and who is intent on doing so at the first available opportunity.

2. The guy is an expert, going so far as to have an explosive-rigged building filled with hostages as his ace in the hole.

3. Doctor Octopus (in Peter Parker’s body) is a bright guy, and figured out how to save the hostages beforehand and disable the bombs. When Massacre clicks his detonator and nothing happens, it’s game over.

As usual, the criminal (in this case, one who isn’t supposed to be capable of emotions) fears for his life after he has been caught and his hangs in the balance. Funny how those epiphanies happen at just the right moment, isn’t it? And as usual, Dan Slott via Peter Parker tries to make the case that killing is always off limits for the hero because “there’s always hope” … for change. (Think Mr. Slott’s version of Peter voted for President Obama?)

If Peter Parker comes back to life, or takes back control of his mind — or does whatever the heck he needs to since the exact status of his soul is still in question — he should rename himself the Amazing Red-Herring Man, because Doctor Octopus rightly points out that sudden feelings of guilt and remorse changes nothing — particularly for the dozens of lives the murderer extinguished. The innocents are still dead. The family and friends and loved ones still must pick up the pieces while the murderer lives on. Over time the victims are forgotten about, and dupes like Peter Parker feel sympathy for the monster who must atone for his sins.

4. And so, it appears as though Dan Slott took the intellectually lazy way out, having the Superior Spider-Man then play judge, jury and executioner with a suddenly defenseless man.

If Slott wanted readers to wrestle with a moral conundrum, wouldn’t it have been better to have placed the hero in a position where the only way to save a life was to take a life? That’s what law enforcement agencies and military men have to deal with on a daily basis. They are put into situations where they have a split second to act, and the only way to save innocents is to end the life of the men who threaten them.

5. Dan Slott doesn’t get that, and it shows when he fills Wolverine’s mouth with nonsensical, morally-relativistic pap.

Wrong, Wolverine (aka: Dan Slott). Combatants on the battlefield do not have the same rights granted to civilians. That is another complex issue that Marvel readers don’t get to explore because to my knowledge there has never been a run where Captain America’s black ops against the Taliban were told. He was more interested in taking down the Tea Party than the Taliban over the past few years, which should tell you something about the intellectual courage of the writers and editors currently taking up residence at the “House of Ideas.”

Readers could have had an instance where Doc Ock killed while in Peter’s body in a way that left even Peter haunted by the fact that the right thing was done in an impossible situation. Pete would have forever asked himself: “What would I have done?” Instead, everything is clearly spelled out: Doctor Octopus did the wrong thing because he executed a defenseless man without a trial by jury.

6. Fast Forward to the end of Superior Spider-Man #6, and Ghost-like Peter is losing his mind that Doc Ock has beaten a couple of hack villains to a bloody pulp, which begs the question: Shouldn’t Ghost-like Peter have been in total meltdown mode the entire issue since Massacre apparently was executed on live television hours earlier? I guess technically it wasn’t shown, but it would be a rather cheap “out” if Massacre was spared.

Note: For those who take issue with the “live television” phrasing, the issue heavily implied that everyone knew what happened. Jonah knew. The Avengers knew. News reports mentioned that Spider-Man “neutralized” the situation . Massacre went to a place where he would get maximum media coverage. There would have been security cameras everywhere. These little things call “cell phones” exist. There were witnesses. Check out the Spider-Man Crawlspace review of issue #11 for more details.

The bottom line is this: After six issues of the Superior Spider-Man, it is more apparent than ever that the decision to kill off The Amazing Spider-Man in the manner Mr. Slott did was not worth the cost in good will towards Marvel. For every interesting morsel readers are given to chew on, there are mouthfuls of spoiled stale ideas that remind them why “Superior” is vastly inferior to its predecessor.

Although, truthfully, why does Marvel care? These days, the guys in charge know that their Chinese censorship cop overlords will help bring in the cash, provided the artistic integrity is left at the door. I doubt that will be a problem for the guys who are asking you to root for the Superior Spider-wannabe-rapist.

Update: Newsrama has seemingly blocked me from commenting on a blog about … me. I guess when you tactfully defend yourself you’re a troll. Or perhaps if you make Dan Slott look bad the powers that be cut you off. That happens when you’re friends with the writer.

Dan Slott stalks comic fan, gets intellectually body slammed

February 1, 2013July 30, 2013by Douglas Ernst10 Comments

It was only weeks ago that Marvel’s Dan Slott “killed” off Peter Parker in Amazing Spider-Man #700 and handed the hero’s mantle to a villain who wanted to transcend Hitler and Pol Pot in terms of evil perpetrated upon the world. It was only a few weeks ago that Dan Slott thought long-time Spider-Man fans would be okay reading a rip-off of 2003’s “Freaky Friday” starring Jamie Lee Curtis and Lindsay Lohan — only with Spider-Man and Doctor Octopus. (Or was that 1988’s “Vice Versa” starring Judge Reinhold and Fred Savage?) And it was only a few weeks ago that Dan Slott assumed that no one would care if an American icon’s arch enemy took over the hero’s body and then put the moves on his true love. (Doctor Octopus isn’t a rapist — yet — he’s just a wannabe rapist, you “crazy town banana pants” little fool.)

Well, now the “Superior Spider-Man” has had two issues come out, and while fans haven’t yet been treated to the the “Superior Spider-Rapist,” Mr. Slott has assured us that we will forever have the Superior Self-Pleasuring Spider-Man. As the guys over a Spider-Man Crawlspace observed:

Everyone was so worried that a rape-by-deception would occur between Otto and MJ, this other possibility never even occurred to them: if you take over someone else’s body and then masturbate it in, is that rape?

Yes, this is how far Marvel has fallen. Narcissistic man-boys like Dan Slott are in control of the wheel, drunk on their editorial power. They’re so dizzy that they don’t even realize they’ve gone over a cliff and are careening for the pavement. The character of Spider-Man over the past six years or so has been talked about not because of his spell-binding stories, but because of the antics and gimmicks of the writers in charge.

And so, it was with great pleasure that I watched a comic fan absolutely destroy Dan Slott on YouTube for all the world to see. Dan Slott, the guy who trolls the internet looking for excuses to talk about how great he is or how dumb his detractors are, finally stalked the wrong dude.

Behold: Mr. Slott is intellectually pummeled into a pile of goo. For those who read Amazing Spider-Man #700, please recall the scene in which Doctor Octopus (in Peter’s body) punches the Scorpion’s jaw clean off with one blow. Imagine someone verbally making contact like that with Dan Slott’s body again … and again … and again, because that’s what The Main Event video is like.

If you’re a fan who has heard about the bizarre behavior of Dan Slott, you’ll love it. And if you’re like me, who was blocked from his Twitter account — even though I never even interacted with the guy (i.e., he finds stories about himself online and blocks people who disagree with him) — then you’ll enjoy it even more.

Dan Slott finally stalked the wrong guy. In one extemporaneous speech, the creator of The Main Event tore his online behavior to shreds. It was like he took his big strong hands, wrapped them around Mr. Slott's head, and just squeezed until all that was left was a giant puddle of ego on the floor. — Dan Slott finally stalked the wrong guy. In one extemporaneous speech, the creator of The Main Event tore the Marvel writer’s online behavior to shreds. It was like he took his big strong hands, wrapped them around Mr. Slott’s head, and just squeezed until all that was left was a giant puddle of ego on the floor.

First, the abridged version:

Dan Slott, you are not worthy to don the shirt of Captain America on your chest. You’re not. Especially with the way you act. You didn’t learn anything from Spider-Man. You didn’t learn anything (obviously) from Captain American. With your actions — the way you act — you should be ashamed of yourself. You are way too old to be online picking fights with people because they have a difference of opinion. It’s that simple. I’ll put it like this: I spent my eight dollars on ASM #700. It was not up to par. It was unsatisfactory — to me. Okay? I have a right as a consumer, to my opinion. It’s that simple. That’s how it works. If you don’t like it, deal with it. It’s that simple….

Apparently, Dan Slott does this all the time. That’s right. He goes on the forums and fights with people on the internet over stuff that is said about him. Mind you, I didn’t even say anything about him … but now he’s going on Spider-Man Crawlspace. … Apparently, he has a history of flaming people and fighting with people. At one point he does try to act somewhat like an adult until he tells the guy to f**k off. Literally: F**k off. You’ve got to be kidding me. This old man is acting that way. …

In another interview he complains so much about the fan backlash and death threats … And this is what a person said to him. They said to him on Twitter that they would take a pencil and ram in through his eye. This is what a person said to him. Do you know what Dan Slott said? He’s “old.” He’s “out of shape.” All right. So you should know if you’re out of shape you should be taking care of yourself. He’s out of shape and he can’t defend himself. That’s what he said. But what he would do, is sue.

So let’s get something straight here. You go online, you troll people, you fight with people, but when someone tries to bring it to you in the real you want to sue them. That’s the most cowardly thing I’ve seen in my life. And if that’s how you act, and you bring that behavior to your fan base (and that’s how they act) then there’s a problem.

And Marvel, I’ll put it like this: You need to take care of this. Because as far as I’m concerned, I will never buy a book with Dan Slott’s name on it ever again. … Understand Marvel, you hired Dan Slott. He represents you. And this is how he acts. Online. An old man. This is how he acts. Understand that this is not the way things are supposed to be. It’s time to put some of these dudes out to pasture. It really is. Dan Slott, you should be ashamed of yourself.

Boom. Smack down. Pile driver. Whatever you want to call it, this guy is spot on. The only thing that would make this video better would be if it turned out that he’s liberal. Then, given the conservative nature of this website, we can say that Dan Slott’s behavior is so strange and so odd and so worthy of condemnation that it transcends ideology.

Bravo, Dan. Bravo. You are truly a sight to behold, even if it’s for all the wrong reasons.

And now, the full video. Well done, sir. A classic.

Amazing Spider-Man #700: Doc Slott pens ending only villains could love

December 26, 2012December 28, 2012by Douglas Ernst10 Comments

Is the Superior Spider-Man a rapist? Has Dan Slott penned one of the most insulting send offs for an American icon in the history of comics? Given that the “Superior” Spider-Man would have slept with Mary Jane if given the chance in Amazing Spider-Man #700, it would be hard to argue with anyone who says “yes” to the former. (At a minimum, he’s a wannabe rapist.) The answer to the latter is, unequivocally, yes.

Dan Slott's Superior Spider-Man was given access to Peter Parker's memories and, not surprisingly, fallen for Mary Jane. Since he made no attempt to disclose this information while trying to sleep while simply kissing her — Dan Slott’s Superior Spider-Man was given access to Peter Parker’s memories and, not surprisingly, fell for Mary Jane. Since he made no attempt to disclose this information while trying to sleep with her or while stealing a kiss, readers will be forgiven if they refer to him as the Superior Spider-Rapist. (Image: Amazing Spider-Man #700)

Writer Dan Slott told readers to check out the book before passing judgment. Now that Amazing Spider-Man #700 has hit the shelves, the vast majority of fears regarding the issue have been realized. Besides, who needs to read the story when Slott has already spelled out exactly what his intentions were in an interview with CNN:

Dan Slott: For all intents and purposes, [Otto] was the adult Peter could have become, Spider-Man’s dark reflection. So what if we flipped it? What if we gave him a second chance? Peter’s final, heroic act was giving Doc all the memories and experiences that kept him on the right path. But is that enough? Can that overcome Ock’s true nature?

It was never Peter’s decision to give Doc a “second chance” because even in the Marvel Universe that pesky thing called the rule of law exists. A character with a history of murder, mayhem and crimes against humanity does not simply get to realize “with great power comes responsibility” and be absolved (legally and morally) for his sins. The evil cherry on top of Dan Slott’s poisonous sundae is that the villain murders the hero and then convinces himself that it’s okay because he’ll be “a better Spider-Man than you ever were. From this day forth, I shall become The Superior Spider-Man!”

Someone needs to tell Mr. Slott that you get a “second chance” after you’ve atoned for your sins. You get a “second chance” after you’ve legally paid your dues for the wrongs you have wrought on society. You don’t get a second chance simply because there’s a moment in time you realize what an evil maniacal bastard you’ve been for your entire adult life. Dan Slott’s attempt to convince readers that they should accept Otto Octavius as Spider-Man is an Orwellian effort only the Inner Party could love: War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength. Spider-Man is Doctor Octopus. Evil is Good. Deceit is Honesty.

There are consequences for our actions. The character Peter Parker let the thief go who ended up murdering his Uncle Ben and he had to live with the consequences for the rest of his life. Likewise, the character Otto Octavius openly stated he wanted to transcend Pol Pot and Hitler — and had the track record to prove he gave it his best shot. As much as writers would like to wonder “What if?” in regards to such a villain, a responsible creative team would never say, “Let’s kill off one of the world’s most beloved characters and try and convince his legions of fans that his arch enemy, deep down, was always the “superior” hero.”

With the release of Amazing Spider-Man #700, it’s official: Marvel has given its fans a gigantic radioactive middle finger. Hopefully, the response will be to treat the Super Spider-Man like the toxic insult he is.

It takes more than “unparalleled genius” and “boundless ambition” to be Peter Parker. “Friends, Romans, countrymen … Dan Slott hath told you that Spider-Man was an ambitious man … for Dan Slott is an honorable man.” (Image: Amazing Spider-Man #700)

Spider-Man: War Zone liability thinks small in big situations

May 25, 2012May 25, 2012by Douglas Ernst18 Comments

A week ago I covered Spider-Man, and how liberal writers have turned him into a walking war zone liability. In a situation where 6 billion lives hung in the balance, the friendly neighborhood Spider-Man did the “neighborly” thing and thought to use precious seconds wondering whether a bunch of North Korean soldiers (those same guys overseeing the world’s most notorious gulags) were ushered to safety before explosives took out the weapons … they were guarding. He then saw fit to warn his soldierly teammates “no one dies,” precisely the kind of all-or-nothing delusional thinking that sets the stage for death to occur.

Issue #686 of Amazing Spider-Man takes place right after our heroes believe half the world has been destroyed. With carnage surrounding them, Black Widow tells Spider-Man they must leave immediately, as time is not on their side if they want to save the roughly 3 billion people remaining on earth. Spider-Man’s response? He’s not budging because he has people to save right there. Dan Slott’s Spider-Man is so myopic that he only sees the lives right there in front of him. He’s like a baby, tricked by peek-a-boo because his mind isn’t fully developed; if there are lives to be saved right in front of him, there’s a good chance he can be distracted. The Black Widow knows it and, sadly, his deadliest foes take advantage of it.

Spider-Man Black Widow — With 3 billion lives at stake and with every second counting, Dan Slott’s Spider-Man wanted to play search and rescue. It’s an honorable job, but the problem with that is this: At that moment in time Spidey was the guy who was supposed to be saving the world — not Black Widow.

Mysterio and Chameleon — Even Spider-Man’s deadliest foes know that while his heart is pure, his mind is clouded with the quixotic belief that “no one dies” on his watch. Like a heroic Spider-Man-Pigeon, he’s easily distracted by lives in immediate danger, never acknowledging that by “saving” the few to his front, he may very well condemn 3 billion to his rear. A hero is still a hero, but some of them are meant for city streets, and some of them are meant to determine the fate of the world. Dan Slott’s Spider-Man may save the world, but an honest writer would have penned the more logical conclusion: utter defeat caused by unforced errors.

In the end, Dan Slott gives Spider-Man a reprieve, and the hero is given a chance to save the day by taking advantage of the vanity, greed and hubris of his enemies. The “end of the world” was an illusion meant to distract the heroes and buy time for the machinations of evil men to materialize. It would have worked, but the enemies who literally have the world in their hands want more, overreach and lose it all. Spider-Man takes advantage of his second chance, but it feels like a Deus ex Machina of sorts, freeing the character of the consequences of his short-sighted actions. In the real world we often don’t get second chances.

Even Black Widow can’t resist rubbing Peter Parker’s nose in the evidence of his ignorance — in his own book, no less:

Black Widow Silver Sable Spider-Man — Spider-Man’s complete lack of foresight nearly cost his team the chance to save the world. Black Widow makes sure to let him know it. Lectured by a supposedly-lesser hero in his own title. Sad.

At $4.00 a pop, The Amazing Spider-Man hurts the wallet over the course of a year. These days, it also hurts just to read the title, period. Here’s to hoping Peter learns something from the experience. If not, look for books featuring Black Widow. She deserves it.

Spider-Man won’t kill N. Korean soldiers or waterboard a man to save 6 billion

May 20, 2012July 4, 2015by Douglas Ernst73 Comments

Marvel has officially killed Spider-Man. They did it before with his deal, for all intents and purposes, with the devil. And now they’ve done it again by turning him into such a pacifist clown that his lack of moral clarity actually makes him an accomplice to evil. Correction: Writer Dan Slott’s pacifist-clown take on Spider-Man has made him an accomplice to evil.

Case-in-point would be Marvel’s current storyline, ‘Ends of the Earth.” In it, Doctor Octopus has come up with a plan that could seal the ozone layer and save humanity, but the technology — that only he possesses — could also be used to bring about world-wide genocide. Isn’t the ozone layer so … 1989? Regardless, Spider-Man is convinced his enemy is going to trick the international community into agreeing with him and kill billions with the push of a button.

That is precisely what seems to happen, which makes the “amazing” Spider-Man’s actions leading up to the event so maddening (and that’s not even counting the “one man’s hero is another man’s terrorist” moral relativism that’s dished up by a supporting character).

It all starts with a race to stop a number of satellites from being made, some of which are being put together in North Korea — home of the world’s very notorious, very real gulags. A member of Spidey’s team sets explosives at the factory, taking out all the tech and presumably the North Korean soldiers guarding it. Peter Parker then channels Jimmy Carter, berating the hero: “No one dies! Understood?” Sadly, it turns out the North Koreans — those giving direct aid in an effort to cause a mass-extinction event — were led to safety!

The story then moves on to an interrogation scene, where Peter must extract information from Flint Marko (aka, Sandman) as to the location of another weapons factory.With Flint not wanting to talk, a team member begins the equivalent (arguably) of waterboarding to get the intelligence she needs. Spider-Man acknowledges that he would have caved in to appeals for the “pretty please” approach if the terrorist foot soldier had pleaded with him for just a bit longer. Once again, a braver hero must pick up the slack for Spider-Man’s ineptitude. There is never really any acknowledgement by the characters that Spider-Man is out of his league, or that his “peace at any cost” mentality will actually bring out his worst fears: word-wide death and destruction.

Spider-Man Flint3 — The new Spider-Man waffles on water boarding a guy who could help stop the death and destruction of billions of lives. Let’s just rename Peter Parker ‘Jimmy Carter’ and get it over with.

There is really no way to spin this (no pun intended) into the character’s favor. If good and evil exists — if it is real — then there should be no hesitation by the true hero to do what is right when the moment calls. Not using deadly force for a purse snatcher? Sure. I get it. Freaking out over the death of soldier-scum enablers of one of the most vile, despicable regimes in the world? No excuse. In this day and age, Spider-Man will make a deal with the devil but he won’t kill a few North Korean soldiers when the fate of the world hangs in the balance and the situation demanded it? Thanks a lot, Marvel: You’ve turned my childhood hero into a morally bankrupt loser, sailing through life without a rudder.

My spider-sense is tingling, and it’s telling me Marvel’s Dan Slott might want to talk to Shin in Geun, who escaped from North Korea’s infamous Camp 14, before he writes another issue.

Update: Looks like Dan Slott didn’t bone up on the North Korean regime. See how Spider-Man has become a war zone liability.

Editor’s Note: It’s always fun to see Dan Slott’s CBR drones read my stuff and then distort my words over in their little forums. I suspect the reason why you haven’t tried that in the comments section is because I’d call you out on it immediately.