[002]
GrigorII
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
\
to:
\\\"The main dislike is that Bendis took \\\"teenage\\\" Spider-Man to mean \\\"incompetent\\\" and that Ultimate Spider-Man gets unmasked all the time, not only to major villains like the Goblin but also minor random characters like Silver Sable. Apparently the fact that 616!Peter went through his original high school arc (which was a mere 28 issues by the way) with no one deciphering his secret and then with only the Goblin knowing it, was too much to handle. Likewise, Spider-Man was so competent that when Green Goblin finally unmasked him in OTL, he was shocked that Peter was JustAKid since he was certain he was an ExperiencedProtagonist, the overall effect goes from Batman turning out to be as young as Robin, to Robin trying to be Batman and failing.\\\"
Citation needed on this one. This reason seems too complex to be a general opinion held in the fanbase, and it sounds more like just some editor\\\'s review. And it has a big flaw, and it\\\'s summarized in the last sentence: Spider-Man is \\\'\\\'\\\'not\\\'\\\'\\\' Batman. He has never been the professional hyper-competent and crazy prepared super hero that Batman is. In fact, his whole distinctive trait is that he\\\'s the incompetent super hero, the one who commits all sorts of mistakes and gets in all sorts of embarrasing situations, and then has to wangst, atone or try to fix it. From Uncle Ben\\\'s death in the 1960s to modern day. In fact, just look at his most recent arc in ComicBook/NickSpencersSpiderMan: he could not defeat the two highest losers of loserville without being subjected to a machine that [[spoiler:splitted his Spider-Man and Peter Parker personas, and could have killed him in time if both did not merge back]]. If he got his secret identity under control, that was just because of PlotArmor, and because the trope was not usually defied much at the time anyway.
Citation needed on this one. This reason seems too complex to be a general opinion held in the fanbase, and it sounds more like just some editor\\\'s review. And it has a big flaw, and it\\\'s summarized in the last sentence: Spider-Man is \\\'\\\'\\\'not\\\'\\\'\\\' Batman. He has never been the professional hyper-competent and crazy prepared super hero that Batman is. In fact, his whole distinctive trait is that he\\\'s the incompetent super hero, the one who commits all sorts of mistakes and gets in all sorts of embarrasing situations, and then has to wangst, atone or try to fix it. From Uncle Ben\\\'s death in the 1960s to modern day. In fact, just look at his most recent arc in ComicBook/NickSpencersSpiderMan: he could not defeat the two highest losers of loserville without being subjected to a machine that [[spoiler:splitted his Spider-Man and Peter Parker personas, and could have killed him in time if both did not merge back]]. If he got his secret identity under control, that was just because of PlotArmor, and because the trope was not usually defied much at the time anyway.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Well as that page itself goes
to:
Well as that page itself goes \"\'\'Ironically, a failed attempt at writing a Villain Protagonist can lead to misunderstanding the author\'s intentions and come off as a Designated Hero\'\'\" and it could go the other way too.
These drow commit terrible acts. If the narrative tries to gloss over that and paint them as heroic, it still may be that it fails to actually stretch them into DesignatedHero and leave them squarely into villain territory.
But that needs somebody who actually read the comic and isn\'t a blistering ball of rage against it as the original bringer of the example was.
These drow commit terrible acts. If the narrative tries to gloss over that and paint them as heroic, it still may be that it fails to actually stretch them into DesignatedHero and leave them squarely into villain territory.
But that needs somebody who actually read the comic and isn\'t a blistering ball of rage against it as the original bringer of the example was.
