Spider-Man General Discussion

Tom Taylor Interview

Tom Taylor wrote the Injustice: Gods Among Us comics and while I have issues with the entire premise of that (which is not his fault), his comics are much better written, more interesting, and in a way, more gray than the main games. He does a lot with character and dialogue, and it's probably the best licensed comics published for some time. He also wrote X-Men Red, All-New Wolverine but I haven't read that.

So it'll be interesting to see what he does with Spider-Man, even if it's the second series.

Both X-Men Red and All-New Wolverine are awesome — All-New Wolverine, in particular, has one of the single best issues I've read in recent years.

Which single issue is that? I'd like to check it out. Describe it for me even if you don't have the issue number and title.

Injustice comics are pretty continuity heavy and serialized, but some of the single issues work as standalones. My favorite and what I think a lot consider the best story in the entire is the Injustice Year Four Annual which has Plastic Man show up, and it's hilarious, emotional, and awesome. Artwork is good too. And you don't need any backstory to get into it.

It's All-New Wolverine #21 — it's the last issue in the "Immune" arc, where Laura has to figure out a way to save people from an alien virus. If you want to know what made it so good and don't mind spoilers, read this article I wrote.

Edited by alliterator on Dec 6th 2018 at 8:12:51 AM

Tom Taylor in Injustice has a flair for comedy and seriousness, and a lot of intense bits as well. I mean even if the story is basically Grimdark, he avoids making it too serious, and adds in jokes and bits. So that would make him a good fit for Spider-Man.

At the very least, Im expecting this to be better than the previous run of Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man.

I think Peter David put out one or two decent issues with good scenes. And you know this is the guy who wrote "The Commuter Commuteth", "The Death of Jean Dewolff" (published by the way in "Peter Parker: The Spectacular Spider-Man" and not Amazing, its a second-series story) and "Spider-Man 2099", and it's still better than OMD, so I don't think this should be his NLID. Although Paul Jenkins' Spectacular Spider-Man was the better second-series, and even Acassia's take in Sensational Spider-Man had good issues.

I read the JMS era when it came out. I am one of the fans who got on board after the first Raimi film) and enjoyed it until "Sins' Past" (which honestly I think JMS should have axed the minute Quesada told him he can't make Gwen Peter's babymama and I blame that on him and not JQ, albeit I don't know why JQ approved of that character assassination on Gwen to start with). I read Jenkins' second-series but missed out on David and a few other stuff at the time which I've been catching up on lately.

Huh yeah I remember the Injustice comics.

They manage to be more violent, bloodier, broodier, sadder, angrier, have more deaths, & are just generally far more darker, the characters are even worse people, & fucked than the games could ever be & that’s saying something really.

Don’t read those comics if ya have a week stomach though I heard the quality’s declined after Year 1 anyway.

Edited by slimcoder on Dec 6th 2018 at 10:47:35 AM

I already read Squadron Supreme anyway.

The violence and stuff is there because it's a tie in to a product with a very violent backstory and having violent cutscenes. None of that was made by Tom Taylor. So it has to be on-brand about that stuff. This isn't Ultimatum which screwed over every part of Ultimate Marvel not attached to Bendis. But it's got other stuff and poignant character bits in there too and the Dictator!Superman has a Claremont Magneto and Triumph and Torment Dr. Doom vibe to him and the comics definitely don't cater to the Batgod cult descended from Miller. Here Batman is some General Failure and idiot who gets his supporters killed for stupid reasons. A cool take on Mr. Mxyzsptlk (my all-time favorite Superman villain and among my top fave comics bad guys, and a guy who is criminally underused). And the Plastic Man story is an absolute blast. One of the most enjoyable comics and one that can be read on its own. It's got a Sinestro I can believe in. I don't care for Geoff Johns' Sinestro...actually I don't care for Geoff Johns at all, he brought back Hal Jordan even when John Stewart in the Justice League cartoon was clearly the best and most interesting Green Lantern ever.

Injustice Comics is a perfect example of making a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Take a very unattractive premise but do it so well and execute it with enough grace that even people who don't like it can enjoy it. I mean that's a skill that is lacking among Spider-Man writers since OMD. Tom Taylor didn't like Grimdark Superman (and he wrote a comic early on saying that) but he was asked to do so and he made it work because he had an understanding of the audience and people who feel differently and so on. Whereas Spider-Man comics since OMD are basically made under the impression that those who disliked it are "not true fans", "not essential" and so on.

Speaking of Second Series. What's the opinion on Chris Zdarsky's run on Spider-Man. I gather it's got a lot of positive reviews and it seems less controversial. He did a lot of strong work on Jameson in particular and I heard he wrote MJ well...

Zdarsky is a former collaborator and friend of Matt Fraction who wrote "To Have and to Hold" which is the ultimate pre-emptive Take That! on OMD, made before it came out.

I found the first couple of issues to be mediocre at best, but things definitely got good from the Jameson interview issue onward.

It's a really fun little run, I wish Teresa Parker had hung around longer. Only let down for me was the anniversary time travel arc.

You know, I wonder when Doc Ock inevitably returns to supervillainy, you think he can fill the niche Venom used to occupy? Villain with the same powers as hero,has access to their memories and knows exactly where to hit should the need arise, and generally being an evil version to Spider-Man.

Maybe. These days Venom is getting his own mythos with an entire Symbiote Worldbuilding thing going on, you know the logo on Venom is some dragon that just happens to look like a spider...which okay why not. Don't know where that will go. Don't especially care. The niche that Venom occupied was good for just a few stories anyway, and later he became so popular that they made him an Anti-Hero Substitute and created Carnage to give Venom his own Venom, which led to Maximum Carnage. Before that, he and Spider-Man formed "the pact" which provoked a lot of the same moral objections among Spider-Man writers at the time as SP-Ock and Spider-Man being square does for you, me, and a few others. There was plans to undo that during The Clone Saga but again that thing became this mess. So basically yeah, windleopard is correct that this stuff was done before but it didn't make sense then, was criticized and called out by writers at the time, and it largely caused problems later on. And I don't think that justifies doing it again or in the future when the Fleeting Demographic Rule returns.

Superior Spider-Man is kind of self-defeating. I mean originally it seemed absurd and Black Comedy and that's the tone it started out with, like the idea of "Superior" as Spider-Man's adjective is ridiculous. If it played as Otto being a Randian Objectivist Spider-Man as a riff on Ditko's supposed political baggage over the title it might have worked as a real Deconstruction but then it becomes Indecisive Deconstruction (much like most of The '90s comics its based on). If you look at Dr. Octopus' best stories historically, he's always been a thug-in-labcoat and a gangster-scientist. Like one of his greatest stories is The Owl-Octopus Gang War story by Bill Mantlo, which is literally a gang war he fights to take turf and territory (referenced in the second half of S2 of The Spectacular Spider-Man).

In a long-term brand sense, Octopus simply is incapable of heroism. His character design and personality and long-term continuity simply doesn't make it sustainable. Superior Spider-Man is itself a dull retread of Kaine, who is now here with Scarlet Spider. Putting him in Spider-Man stories ruins the story. I mean Venom and Eddie Brock were compelling because of the Symbiote liking Spider-Man and seeing Eddie Brock as sloppy seconds and Brock being a pathetic toxic character. Whereas Superior Spider-Man has no real flaws right. He's basically Rick Sanchez and Peter is Morty. That doesn't work in a superhero comic like Spider-Man.

At least in the Superior Spider-Man run, he did have flaws. Spider Ock's approach was quickly alienating other heroes and Peter's supporting cast and his arrogance was what allowed the Green Goblin to build a secret empire under his nose. The ending was a wet fart but the build up was promising for a while.

Say what you want about Death of Superman and Knightfall but at the end of that when the "original classics" returned it was a fist-pumping hells yeah moment. I didn't get that when Peter returned. Of course I think the "Dying Wish" story was lame too. Peter died there and I felt nothing. Compare that to Peter's death in Kraven's Last Hunt or even The Other which was not good ultimately but it's still better than Slott's. And of course the stops that Bendis pulled out with Ultimate Spider-Man and the "Death of Spider-Man". When you do a Deconstruction, the ending is the essential point or it falls apart. Alan Moore knows this. If you don't follow through and make your point, then it fails. Slott messing up the ending and execution of Superior Spider-Man simply proves that he should never have done that story to start with.

Correct me if i'm wrong, but i'm pretty sure Doc Ock has some heroics to his name. Like the time he teamed up with Spider-Man against Carlyle and saved some civilians. Or that issue in Spider-Man unlimited where he tries to cure the AIDS of his old girlfriend.

Well most of Spider-Man villains are just thugs with super-powers, but isn't what put Goblin and Ock at the top of the food chain is that they could actually think of a bigger picture? i mean it's established Electro is technically Spider-Man's most dangerous foe but he's too stupid to use his powers properly.

But on the topic of Superior Spider-Man, perhaps part of the reason why Peter's return was meh was again in part of One More Day. like there is a scene where Peter get's his memories back and declares he won't surrender a single moment. which rings hollow when you sell your marriage to Comic Code friendly Satan.

I actually don't think Spider-Man villains can ever really be too complex or deep owing to the nature of the character and concept. Ta-Nehisi Coates pointed out that in general Batman villains are better than Spider-Man's. Batman's are also better than Superman's, whose rogues while having some standouts are fairly lame. Spider-Man's rogues are better than Supes' for what it's worth though I'd put Brainiac and Mr. Mxyzsptlk and Darkseid over all of Spidey's, and Luthor Depending on the Writer (DCAU Luthor yes, the others not so much). The reason is because of the nature of stories. In the Golden and Silver Age audiences pretty much knew that the villains were cooler than Batman and Robin. This was also reflected in the Adam West Batman show, where basically people tuned in to see the rogues, who were plainly more colorful and fun. It's also the case for the first two Tim Burton films as Burton admitted^note ]He pointed out about Batman Returns that he had a hard time getting in with the whole "heroes punish the villains" concept because he saw both Penguin and Catwoman as tragic empathetic freaks, and I'd argue that Catwoman is the real hero of that film.. Later they managed to make both Batman and Bruce interesting of course but at core, Batman is about his villains. The Dark Knight is the most important Batman film and that movie is entirely about Joker and Two-Face, where Bale's Batman has much less to do than in the movies before and after it.

But for both Spider-Man and Superman, the most important characters in their stories are themselves and their supporting cast. Great Superman stories (Alan Moore's stuff among others) are all about that. Peter Parker is likewise the most complex and interesting character in Spider-Man and his supporting cast has J. Jonah Jameson, arguably the most ambiguous and original character of that time in that he can't be classified as entirely good or entirely bad. And of course you have MJ who is this charismatic presence and as many writers have pointed out, one of Marvel's most interesting and complex female characters on the whole.

The villains are important and so on, but unlike Batman where these villains have these complicated themes and ideas and stuff attached to them. For Spider-Man they're just villains and interferences. So Dr. Octopus and Norman Osborn while they might have shades and a few moments are fundamentally not characters capable of overshadowing Spidey.

Edited by Revolutionary_Jack on Dec 9th 2018 at 6:37:10 AM

I'd argue most Batman villains aren't particularly complex. They're mostly known for their gimmicks and being outdated depictions of mental illness.

In the context of superhero comics, Batman villains are more complex and interesting than others. More than that they are entertaining and charismatic figures. Historically, Marvel Comics' most fascinating, complex and interesting villains are Doctor Doom (especially with Stern and Mignola's Triumph and Torment), Claremont's Magneto, and the Galactus of Jack Kirby's original story. None of Spidey's villains are close to that level. Even Ultron with his Oedipus Complex thing is interesting though not always well written.

If you go outside the genre, great villains are stuff like Iago, or from the movies Alfred Hitchcock's Norman Bates or Uncle Charlie from Shadow of a Doubt played by Joseph Cotten the visual inspiration for Norman and Harry Osborn, right from hairstyle to facial structure (and Uncle Charlie is probably the character that inspired the Goblin). Harry Lime in The Third Man (who inspired Vader). Boris Karloff's Frankenstein or heck King Kong himself. Al Pacino in Scarface and the Godfather.

I wouldn't say Batman's villains or most superhero villains are as complex as that. So Batman villains are complex in that small field and the Bruce Timm cartoons made them more so. But Spidey's villains are less so compared to that. Fundamentally, Dr. Octopus is not as interesting and complex a character as Spider-Man and Peter Parker or any of his supporting cast. Norman Osborn is the most interesting and dynamic of the villains but I wouldn't say he's a complex character, but he's entertaining and charismatic as a figure and presence (though more as Goblin and less as himself). The most complex characters in Spider-Man, most developed and interesting are Peter, Jameson, and Mary Jane.

Edited by Revolutionary_Jack on Dec 9th 2018 at 7:08:57 AM

Newspaper MJ proved this week why she is just the most care-free version of the character...she took the fact her big break in Hollywood bombed in stride, teased Peter but assured him she didn't blame him for wrecking her theatre back home, and has enough confidence in her financial situation to want to take time out and tour Australia with her husband.

Edited by Zarius on Dec 9th 2018 at 10:02:41 AM

I for one found another in the single-issue Pantheon: Roger Stern's "The Daydreamers" (ASM-246). I am amazed that this comic is kind of forgotten even if Stern thinks it's one of his best. It's got a wonderful experimental style, incredible art-work and effects by John Romita Jr, amazing writing, and some of the best character work on Felicia Hardy, Jameson, MJ, and Peter. It's also very funny and shifts moods. I think it might be among my all-time favorite stories.

And it proves my point, Spidey's about himself and his supporting cast more than his villains.

This is interesting. Iris West of The Flash was slated to be killed all the way back in Flash #176 in 1967, six years before Gwen Stacy was killed in The Amazing Spider-Man. The cover proposed for the issue was instead used for #184 with an altered storyline, and the article notes that had the death gone through we could be talking about her death instead of Gwen's as the watershed for the Bronze Age of comics. (Unlike Gwen, she apparently would have died via a fever and/or Death itself.)

Edited by lalalei2001 on Dec 9th 2018 at 10:52:21 AM