hellzyeahthewebwieldingavenger - Tumblr blog

hellzyeahthewebwieldingavenger · 3 months

Text

If he does I'm glad other people will be enjoying it.

To be blunt though, since this is a version of Peter who either can't be or shouldn't believably be like the regular version I don't really care.

And even putting that aside, honestly, I thought it was a dull read all on its own merits.

Like imagining this was an OC and not Spider-Man, there wasn't much in this issue to give us an insight into who Peter is and hook us in. Surely a first issue of any series should do that?

I read Ultimate Spider-Man #1 by Hickman

So I checked this out in isolation of the whole event or events leading up to it.

I'm trying to decide if this is a case of false advertising or if it is actually as disappointing as it seemed.

This series was marketed on the grounds of 'come check out a married Spider-Man with kids'. But that was by no means the focus of the story. The focus was upon a) Uncle Ben's grieving Aunt May and b) peter's choice about whether to be Spider-Man or not.

Let me steelman and say, hey, the marketing was exploitative but that isn’t Hickman’s fault.

Honestly, this premise is still rather broken.

Let’s say, for the sake of argument, this universe is identical to 616 except the Maker has strategically meddled with it to avert the existence of superheroes.

Okay…so he made sure Peter’s parents died when he was 15 instead of like a toddler. And also that he wasn’t bitten by the spider. And also that there was no burglar. Couldn’t he have just gotten rid of the spider? Why all the extra stuff? And if he didn’t do anything other than get rid of the spider…why are all those other things different?

Speaking of which how/when/why does Jameson know the Parker family at all? Uncle Ben was a factory worker, he had NOTHING to do with the newspaper business and why would a working class guy like him know a millionaire/billionaire like Jameson? Why would he ever go into that business? Why would the Maker change that at all? If he didn’t change that how could ANY of the changed he made in the timeline ever have resulted in that?

Similarly, why is PETER working for the Bugle? Peter’s interest in photography was specifically in relation to his career as Spider-Man. Yes, he developed something of an interest in it later in life in his 20s, but that was a fleeting thing after he left college. It was never really his long term career goal. Sure, you could say he is working on the science section of the Bugle. But…why? Why wouldn’t he just, you know….go into a scientific field in general? What does the Maker gain from changing that if he was responsible for changing that at all?*

And this, in fact, is a microcosm of how the premise of this story is borked. In a world where Peter Parker

Is an adult

Was not really raised by Uncle Ben and Aunt May because his parents died when he was 15

Never experienced the death of Uncle Ben or Aunt May in his teens

Was never a superhero

HOW exactly is he the character we know and love? The fun of a What If or AU is contrasting the new version to the character we are familiar with. But by rights he should be MASSIVELY different as a person. He wasn’t raised by people who were almost a generation older than his parents. He didn’t have to bear the burden of being a provider or caregiver for his household as a teenager. He never had to cope with the guilt of Uncle Ben’s death. And would he even know the Great Power/Great Responsibility thing considering it was a combination of being RAISED by his aunt and uncle along with Ben’s death that drilled that into him? In this universe neither of those things are factors so if he DOES live by that life lesson how and why would he?

As an extension of that, how and why did he wind up with Mary Jane considering his upbringing combined with his life as Spider-Man were important factors in them falling in love. Mary Jane was attracted to his sense of responsibility, but that sense of responsibility came about due to his upbringing and that upbringing has changed. Not to mention, given her abusive father, knowing Peter was a man who had incredible power (like her father had over her) but used it responsibility was a HUGE aspect of her attraction to him, plus she got turned on by the danger to some extent.

So…how did they hook up? Unless the Maker for some fucking reason decided to make sure MJ’s Dad was a successful author and never touched the booze. But WHY would he do that????????????

And then you have the big one which is…Peter can magically sense he is in fact supposed to be Spider-Man….um…Okay, so, yes, Peter does have a certain belief in destiny because he talked about it maybe being his destiny to be Spider-Man when he was a teenager and even older. But…that was a belief. He questioned it. He never SENSED that about himself. You could argue being Spider-Man is from his POV something he doesn’t have a choice about, but that’s like saying a parent doesn’t have a choice to look after their kids. They do. It’ just that you do not have a choice about it if you feel compelled to be a good person. It was never a magical bullshit thing.

Hickman in this regard and in his general portrayal of Peter is almost making this weird ass nature over nurture argument. That Peter wouldn’t been broadly the same kind of guy we always knew him to be albeit he could commit to a 9/5, a family and be less tightly strung because he doesn’t have the stress of heroism or guilt shit. And I guess he has less of a sense of humour? (Although so does Uncle ben, though he is grieving…although Jonah is a lot more touchey feeley than he should be as well sooooooo….)

But that’s just…lame.

It’s making a mockery of Peter Parker’s struggles in the 616 and most traditional portrayals. His experiences are integral in forming him into who he is as a person. Hickman is arguing that Richard and Mary’s DNA was actually the most important thing in shaping his personality. Unless are we really saying Richard and Mary would’ve been broadly the same kind of parents May and Ben were? They were goddam CIA agents!?

And on top of that…the story is making this BROKEN argument for Peter being a superhero. He feels like he is drifting through life. He feels unfulfilled. Like something is missing. Uh huh…um…what about your kids bro?

If you become a superhero aren’t you going to be potentially exposing your family to danger? Don’t you risk your kids growing up without a father because you get killed, crippled or are generally occupied a lot by being a hero.

Now, to be clear, that situation is A LOT different to 616 Peter who already had great power before meeting MJ. He also started his career at age 15 vs this Peter who’s literally going to learn how to web-swing and fight at age 35! Shit, most people whobecome soldiers, fire fighters or police officers don’t START their careers (with 0 training btw) at age 35! And there is a massive support network for those roles too.

I’m not saying Peter can’t be a superhero and a family man, but I am saying it is morally wrong for him to CHOOSE to turn himself into a superhero when he already is a family man. This is like saying it is okay for a man in his midlife crisis to blow a chunk of the family savings on a sports car or get himself a 20 year old mistress because it will make him a more engaged husband and father.

Basically, this first issue represents a lose-lose scenario from where I am standing. We don’t know much about how this Peter is different. The ways in which he is don’t make sense. The ways in which he is similar don’t make sense. These questions need to be answered BEFORE we get to the premise of the story (Peter choosing to be Spider-Man at age 35 when he is a family man). And the premise itself is unbelievable unless we want to buy into Peter being a selfish asshole, which therefore makes him unlikable in general and very much NOT like the Spidey we know and love.

Basically, this series might as well NOT be about Peter Parker in the first place, but some other guy living through a mid-life crisis by becoming a superhero.

*Are you noticing how I kee coming back to the Maker as a explanation for these changes? I don’t even know if the stuff leading into this spelt out what he was and wasn’t involved with, but that is a big question that should be addressed. Unfortunately it is the ONLY way to explain these changes beyond ‘its just different because it is’. And either way it is lazy and lame as shit.

69 notes · View notes

hellzyeahthewebwieldingavenger · 3 months

Text

“It is presented in ultimate universe #1 as something that thor, reed (who here is doom, to show how much the maker's changes have affected) and tony all felt before they knew it. So part of the premise is that they have that underlying feeling. But if we have to specificy with peter, in invasion he has the bit about maybe it being his turn, before it doesnt happen. That and playing on the whole "showing them all" part of af15 i guess”

If the figures in this universe has some kind of supernatural sensory ability for who they should be then that should have been better conveyed in this issue because every issue is someone’s first.

“Does it? The premise is peter becoming spidey when he's 35 and the tagline in the YT trailer (with almost 700k views) is quite literally "a spider-man saga unlike any other".”

It might be a Spidey Saga unlike any other but the reason for that is it isn’t a very good premise in the first place. That is why no one has done this before. It’d be potentially interesting if this was a believable extrapolation of the Peter we are familiar with who didn’t get his powers and becomes Spider-Man at age 35. But if it is a version of Peter who is becoming Spider-Man at 35 and is different in some ways and similar in others in an entirely arbitrary manner because this universe is just generally different, then I do not see the point. The entire interest in the premise would naturally stem from exploring how changing specific variables would impact the character we know. Otherwise, this is just a fanfic.

“Meanwhile the original USM's idea wsa "spider-man but in the 2000s from the ground up" geared for adaptations to use it as a source material.”

Not exactly. Marvel did opt to use USm for adaptations, but that wasn’t THE point of it at all. A MASSIVE rationale behind USM (and Marvel never openly admitted this) was to REPLACE 616 Spider-Man because the sales for ASM were catastrophic at the time. They threw around the idea of cosmically altering reality so Peter was in high school again but then opted for USM. The mentality was USM is what Spider-Man was originally intended to be and shold have always been instead of the old divorced guy he was at the time (im paraphrasing but Bendis in a 2004 interview said something like that).

Obviously, it was set in the modern day yes, but it whilst that was the advertised premise, whilst that is what fans claim the series did, on closer examination the original USM NEVER did that. Many characters had their roles, dynamics and personalities changed in various ways big and small for that to be the case. Bendis’ self-insert OC Kong McFarlane was a more relvant supporting character than Flash who, if memory serves, not only wasn’t in the series as much as he was in like Ditko’s era (relatively, obviously Ditko was like 28 issues in high school) but also had no redeeming qualities to him. He was even racist IIRC. Then you have MJ not having MJ’s backstory or personality, same with Gwen. Richard Parker being this MASSIVELY important character in Peter’s life, to the point where ‘Great Power = Great Responsibility’ was something he originally said and Uncle Ben just passed that along. Aunt May never had any major health issues requiring Peter to be the breadwinner for the family. Venom being Peter’s childhood friend whilst Harry was hardly in the series. And God…Hulk Goblin…

I’ve always said Spectacular Spider-man the cartoon is what the USM comic book SHOULD have been and it is much closer to Spider-Man from the ground up in the modern day than USM ever was. And noticeably, it was first and foremost rooted in Lee/Ditko/Romita.

“And hoenstly i would argue the first four arcs of Bendis’s USM were pretty good, he only started to drop the ball later.”

I’m sorry but I do not agree with that at all.

I admit I do not recall the first 4 arcs, but the first 3 were the origin/Green Goblin, Kingpin and Doc Ock.

Now, Kingpin I wouldn’t disagree about. the origin for the most part was actually quite good (which was co-written by Bill Jemas) but again…Hulk Goblin is trash. The Doc Ock arc was ridiculously slow, change Otto’s personality too much and reduced Kraven to a Steve Irwin joke.

“And honestly comparing it with the first issue of bendis’s USM it does just as much to set its characters, argubaly more so by giving both JJ, Ben and harry actual motivations going foward.”

But the difference is that Bendis’s USM #1 started with a Peter who was a kid, who was relatively recognisable to the 616 Peter pre-powers albeit in the modern day. This Peter is having me ask who is he and how did he wind up this way given that I know, and the reader is clearly EXPECTED to know, the standard version. Why is he working at the Bugle? How did he and MJ fall in love? What was his upbringing like given that his parents raised him until he was 15? How did they die? How did that affect him? And all of this is before we get to the actual premise of becoming Spider-Man at 35. I can’t care about Peter becoming Spider-Man at age 35 if I don’t know WHO Peter is because I don’t know much about him or the life he has lived. And choosing to give yourself powers and become a hero and endanger your family at that age is a REALLY irresponsible decision that needs to be better justified than it was. Hearing the premise from a friend I figured the logical story would have been to explore his life as he wrestled with the decision, either culminating in justifying him making the choice to himself powers, or else Peter is put in a situation where functionally he’d have no choice. E.g. he needs the power to save his family or something.

This was just ‘I feel something is missing and I am on autopilot. So now I will become a superhero vigilante.’ Like…isn’t that a HUGE decision that is going to affect your family in a massive way? The conversation he had with MJ was an utter joke because it was both short, not actually addressing the proper concerns parents and partners should be talking about and, if MJ knew what the conversation was really about (I couldn’t tell myself), then I’m asking why the Hell is SHE okay with endangering her family like that? It’s VERY different to her meeting and marrying and having kids with a Peter Parker who is ALREADY Spider-Man.

“I mean, its part of the setup that they’re a couple. Tho honestly…i think them getting togheter is one of the easiest parts to buy. MJ already thought peter was cute pre-bite in parell lives, and she only blew off their introductory dates becuase she knew he was spidey, and without that and presumably peter never being in a relationship with gwen they’d probably just jump at it sooner, even if with time and all. And i mean originally what we saw was the journey of them falling in love, but this is a story that starts with them already in love, using the fact that they’re the defacto couple in nearly every iteration to start them in a different point in life.”

I’m sorry, but I don’t buy that. MJ might’ve thought Peter was cute, but being Spider-Man helped him look more physically attractive and, more importantly, what about his PERSONALITY?

His personality isn’t going to be the same if he isn’t Spider-Man. Being Spider-Man is PART of why she fell in love with him. His sense of responsibility was forged massively through BEING Spider-Man. Hell, if he isn’t stressed the fuck out supporting his family and being a superhero, how much is HE going to be attracted to her carefree side? That’s not even getting into how different his personality would be if he wasn’t raised by ben and May and lost his parents at age 15.

In no way is it a done deal that these two would definitely hook up regardless. Is Peter seeing past her party girl façade? Is he bothering to put the work in to get passed that when it took Gwen dying to push MJ into lowering her defences even a little bit? Peter straight up said MJ was hard for him to figure out which is partially what drew him to Gwen (IIRC) so, wouldn’t it go that same way in this universe?

Like, Peter being Spider-Man was PART of MJ resolving her massive commitment issues and therefore choosing to marry Peter. So how does that happen in this universe? The simplest, laziest way to do so is that it’s a sideeffect of everything else being different.

You are right that part of the premise is them AS a couple, but that’s lame considering the selling point of this book is reliant upon pre-familiarity with Spider-Man. This book is a nothing burger if you pretend its about some brand new character.

“I mean there was a whole 5 issue prelude to more or less explain why things are different as the main hook for all 4 upcoming books. And this, much like the original ultimate, or earth one, or the new 52’s earth two or noir, or gaslight or 1602 is a pure AU. Its not a what if, or a bool sold around the idea that its a spin off from 616 ala spider-girl. If anything the main hook here is that this setting is a reversal of the original ultimate. Also related honestly peter’s parents being alive makes sense as a result of the stuff maker does to begin with, since there’s no US, there’s no SHIELD, so they wouldnt go on a plane and die when he’s a baby.”

If there was a prelude that explained everything, that infor should have been in this book as well. Every issue is someone’s first.

I don’t think those comparisons are appropriate. 1602, gaslight, noir take the stuff we are familiar with and overlay a particular theme. They reimagine the characters through the lens of those themes, which are period pieces

I can’t speak to Earth One or Two as I’ve not read them.

New 52 however is not a pure AU, it was a reboot and was thus obliged to respect the core characterisations and premises of the characters, which in most respects it didn’t hence people hated it.

I’ve already spoken about Ultimate. It was supposed to be essentially an adaptation of the original stuff in the modern day but it failed at being that.

If this new Ultimate Universe is just an AU where stuff is randomly different because it is then…there is honestly no point to it. It’s not a modern adaptation. It isn’t a period piece reimagining. Its just Hickman’s fanfiction in the same way the old USM was Bendis’ fanfiction.

I do not see how this is a reversal of the original ultimate, just because Peter is 35 that’s not a reversal. And I don’t think an ironic reversal is worth the time and money and energy this book is asking of the audience.

If you say his parents being alive makes sense, okay. But then HOW did they die? How did that affect him? How did they raise him vs ben and May? What was even their jobs? Were they still secret agents?

“Its more so that it is played with, in that context its someone using it ironically, since its about preventing a hero from being made by chance. Especially as its someone that would be aware of it once being a college of his peter. The traditional responsability speech is basically giving by ben with the whole bit about inaction coming from the man whose been his parental figure for 20 years here. It amounts to the same message just expressed differently, like the one scene from tasm but a bit better written.”

That is a false equivalency. Ben’s speech is NOT the same as the great power speech at all because peter doesn’t HAVE powers in the first place. He has the option of GIVING himself powers. Morever, I’d argue it wasn’t even the context alone which makes the speech problematic. Ben simply isn’t conveying the same message in the first place. He said stop waiting for something to happen and make it happen yourself. It was about being dynamic and a go-getter. The moral message of AF#15 wasn’t that Peter was waiting for the burglar to be caught so he didn’t do anything. It was that he COULD have done something himself but he was being selfish and misuing the power he had been given.

In this story Peter is being IRRESPONSIBLE in giving himself powers when that’d come at a HUGE potential cost for his family. It’d be different if there was a villain on the loose who, from Peter’s POV, can’t be stopped unless he steps up as Spider-Man, but IIRC that wasn’t the context.

I read Ultimate Spider-Man #1 by Hickman

So I checked this out in isolation of the whole event or events leading up to it.

I'm trying to decide if this is a case of false advertising or if it is actually as disappointing as it seemed.

Let me steelman and say, hey, the marketing was exploitative but that isn’t Hickman’s fault.

Honestly, this premise is still rather broken.

Let’s say, for the sake of argument, this universe is identical to 616 except the Maker has strategically meddled with it to avert the existence of superheroes.

And this, in fact, is a microcosm of how the premise of this story is borked. In a world where Peter Parker

Is an adult

Was not really raised by Uncle Ben and Aunt May because his parents died when he was 15

Never experienced the death of Uncle Ben or Aunt May in his teens

Was never a superhero

So…how did they hook up? Unless the Maker for some fucking reason decided to make sure MJ’s Dad was a successful author and never touched the booze. But WHY would he do that????????????

But that’s just…lame.

Basically, this series might as well NOT be about Peter Parker in the first place, but some other guy living through a mid-life crisis by becoming a superhero.

69 notes · View notes

hellzyeahthewebwieldingavenger · 3 months

Text

I doubt I will be reading that

I read Ultimate Spider-Man #1 by Hickman

So I checked this out in isolation of the whole event or events leading up to it.

I'm trying to decide if this is a case of false advertising or if it is actually as disappointing as it seemed.

Let me steelman and say, hey, the marketing was exploitative but that isn’t Hickman’s fault.

Honestly, this premise is still rather broken.

Let’s say, for the sake of argument, this universe is identical to 616 except the Maker has strategically meddled with it to avert the existence of superheroes.

And this, in fact, is a microcosm of how the premise of this story is borked. In a world where Peter Parker

Is an adult

Was not really raised by Uncle Ben and Aunt May because his parents died when he was 15

Never experienced the death of Uncle Ben or Aunt May in his teens

Was never a superhero

So…how did they hook up? Unless the Maker for some fucking reason decided to make sure MJ’s Dad was a successful author and never touched the booze. But WHY would he do that????????????

But that’s just…lame.

Basically, this series might as well NOT be about Peter Parker in the first place, but some other guy living through a mid-life crisis by becoming a superhero.

69 notes · View notes

hellzyeahthewebwieldingavenger · 3 months

Text

I am too but not in this context where his whole life is different which means he himself should be different. Surely Peter's life experiences are the crucial elements that shaped him into who he is.

If he wasn't raised by Ben and May, didn't grow up considering them his parents in practically every way, didn't have the HUGE life altering experience of losing Uncle Ben, didn't have to become the man of the house, didn't have to live with massive guilt, didn't have to learn how to fight against criminals of the regular and super powered kind, didn't have to deal with the incredible mental and emotional toil of juggling his normal and superhero responsibilities and didn't suffer many loved ones getting hurt or dying (let alone all the vile stuff villains like Norman Osborn or Venom have done to him), he is not going to be basically the same person.

I read Ultimate Spider-Man #1 by Hickman

So I checked this out in isolation of the whole event or events leading up to it.

I'm trying to decide if this is a case of false advertising or if it is actually as disappointing as it seemed.

Let me steelman and say, hey, the marketing was exploitative but that isn’t Hickman’s fault.

Honestly, this premise is still rather broken.

Let’s say, for the sake of argument, this universe is identical to 616 except the Maker has strategically meddled with it to avert the existence of superheroes.

And this, in fact, is a microcosm of how the premise of this story is borked. In a world where Peter Parker

Is an adult

Was not really raised by Uncle Ben and Aunt May because his parents died when he was 15

Never experienced the death of Uncle Ben or Aunt May in his teens

Was never a superhero

So…how did they hook up? Unless the Maker for some fucking reason decided to make sure MJ’s Dad was a successful author and never touched the booze. But WHY would he do that????????????

But that’s just…lame.

Basically, this series might as well NOT be about Peter Parker in the first place, but some other guy living through a mid-life crisis by becoming a superhero.

69 notes · View notes

hellzyeahthewebwieldingavenger · 3 months

Text

1) I dont agree because this presumes Peter would be the same person he was in 616. But here he lost his parents at age 15, he doesnt view Ben as his father, he presumably doesnt have issues with guilt and obviously there are loads of ways being Spidey would impact the man he'd grow into. If it took Ben's death to drill the responsibility thing into him, despite Ben telling him that throughout his life growing up with the man, does he ride and die by that in this universe? In other words if Peter realistically is going to be a very different person would he and MJ find each other attractive? I would say no. It's not that mj liked the glamour of him being a hero but being Spider-Man was part of her attraction and more to the point massively forged peter into the man she fell for

2) I'm not saying Peter cant be a hero and a family man. Im saying it's bad for him to choose to give himself powers and become a hero when he already has a family to think about. It isn't the same thing as him already being a hero before getting married and having kids, letvalone learning the ropes at 35. Similarly, its different to being a hero when fate hands him powers and he has to look after May. He is actively choosing to give himself powers and upend his life. Apart from the potential danger to himself and his family, he is drastically reducing the amount of time he could dedicate to his family or to his presumably 9-5 that supports them

3) To be honest I would have a problem with that, but I think the problem here is that the plot is reliant upon it. But if been told this isnt just a Peter thing, its every hero so I'm willing to let that aspect slide. But if someone changed time so Peter wasnt Spider-Man in another story thatd be different. AoA Cyclops couldn't sense he wasn't supposed to be a bad guy

I read Ultimate Spider-Man #1 by Hickman

So I checked this out in isolation of the whole event or events leading up to it.

I'm trying to decide if this is a case of false advertising or if it is actually as disappointing as it seemed.

Let me steelman and say, hey, the marketing was exploitative but that isn’t Hickman’s fault.

Honestly, this premise is still rather broken.

Let’s say, for the sake of argument, this universe is identical to 616 except the Maker has strategically meddled with it to avert the existence of superheroes.

And this, in fact, is a microcosm of how the premise of this story is borked. In a world where Peter Parker

Is an adult

Was not really raised by Uncle Ben and Aunt May because his parents died when he was 15

Never experienced the death of Uncle Ben or Aunt May in his teens

Was never a superhero

So…how did they hook up? Unless the Maker for some fucking reason decided to make sure MJ’s Dad was a successful author and never touched the booze. But WHY would he do that????????????

But that’s just…lame.

Basically, this series might as well NOT be about Peter Parker in the first place, but some other guy living through a mid-life crisis by becoming a superhero.

69 notes · View notes

hellzyeahthewebwieldingavenger · 3 months

Text

From what you are saying this is more about world building through characters vs being about the characters themselves and USM is just one corner of that world building.

Except I'm not interested in that. At all. And Marvel knew they'd hook people in with the married Spider-Man bit. So....a bait and switch. Standard Disney operating procedure I guess.

I won't hold Hickman accountable for the false advertising, but I will say Spider-Man (and traditionally most every Marvel series exempting F4 maybe) has always been character driven more than it has been about the world building. That was, after all, a major reason why Stan set the characters in New York. NYC exists, you do not need to build that world, he and Jack and Ditko predominantly build it up via introducing new characters.

So...I dunno how much Spider-Man, let alone other characters, lend themselves to that.

I felt the characters in this were mostly cold and flat and in the case of Ben and Jonah hardly recognisable. If we can't judge them by the original versions, or the Ultimate versions, if their whole histories are wholesale different because the world's history is wholesale different I don't realy see the point in this beyond seeing Hickman world build for world building's sake.

I'll add however that I have never liked Hickman's work. Reading Infinity after Infinity Gauntlet back in 2019 was utterly painful.

I read Ultimate Spider-Man #1 by Hickman

So I checked this out in isolation of the whole event or events leading up to it.

I'm trying to decide if this is a case of false advertising or if it is actually as disappointing as it seemed.

Let me steelman and say, hey, the marketing was exploitative but that isn’t Hickman’s fault.

Honestly, this premise is still rather broken.

Let’s say, for the sake of argument, this universe is identical to 616 except the Maker has strategically meddled with it to avert the existence of superheroes.

And this, in fact, is a microcosm of how the premise of this story is borked. In a world where Peter Parker

Is an adult

Was not really raised by Uncle Ben and Aunt May because his parents died when he was 15

Never experienced the death of Uncle Ben or Aunt May in his teens

Was never a superhero

So…how did they hook up? Unless the Maker for some fucking reason decided to make sure MJ’s Dad was a successful author and never touched the booze. But WHY would he do that????????????

But that’s just…lame.

Basically, this series might as well NOT be about Peter Parker in the first place, but some other guy living through a mid-life crisis by becoming a superhero.

69 notes · View notes

hellzyeahthewebwieldingavenger · 3 months

Text

I read Ultimate Spider-Man #1 by Hickman

So I checked this out in isolation of the whole event or events leading up to it.

I'm trying to decide if this is a case of false advertising or if it is actually as disappointing as it seemed.

Let me steelman and say, hey, the marketing was exploitative but that isn’t Hickman’s fault.

Honestly, this premise is still rather broken.

Let’s say, for the sake of argument, this universe is identical to 616 except the Maker has strategically meddled with it to avert the existence of superheroes.

And this, in fact, is a microcosm of how the premise of this story is borked. In a world where Peter Parker

Is an adult

Was not really raised by Uncle Ben and Aunt May because his parents died when he was 15

Never experienced the death of Uncle Ben or Aunt May in his teens

Was never a superhero

So…how did they hook up? Unless the Maker for some fucking reason decided to make sure MJ’s Dad was a successful author and never touched the booze. But WHY would he do that????????????

But that’s just…lame.

Basically, this series might as well NOT be about Peter Parker in the first place, but some other guy living through a mid-life crisis by becoming a superhero.

#Spider-Man #Peter Parker #Ultimate Spider-Man #Jonathan Hickman #mary jane watson #mary jane watson parker #Uncle Ben #Ben Parker

69 notes · View notes

hellzyeahthewebwieldingavenger · 4 months

Text

Happy birthday to Stan Lee !

the four horsemen of happiness

#Stan Lee #Marvel #Marvel Comics #Marvel Universe

754 notes · View notes

hellzyeahthewebwieldingavenger · 5 months

Text

Spot on mate.

I find it repugnant that modern writers (and too many fans) essentially view Peter as not living up to his potential if he doesn't become Bruce Wayne or Tony Stark. As if that is both the natural evolution for his character/the ultimate end goal that everyone should strive for.

What if I told you that you, me, and anyone else don't have to be millionaires to be successful, or happy, or ultimately fulfilled by life?

What if that maybe that is the goal most people should strive for given the reality that most people are not and are unlikely to be millionaires?

What if Peter, who was created to be the everyman superhero, SHOULD reflect that.

And arguably that was WHY his archnemesis was a rich, powerful man who at face value had it all but it wasn't enough for him because deep down he was a twisted piece of shit who was long ago consumed by his inner demons.

Also, I find it WEIRD that this is a prevalent issue with Spider-Man specifically when Superman also obviously has the potential to be rich, successful and own his own business but doesn't. He is content and fulfilled just being a journalist who's family has a farm and he uses his Godlike powers to help people where and when he can. beyond that, he is ultimately happy spending time with his friends and family. And, not for nothing, since 1987 his archnemesis has been an evil businessman with a huge tech conglomerate too. But his best friend is also a businessman with a big company???

Gosh...its almost as these superhero comics are trying to say that being uber rich and successful via a huge business ISN'T the ultimate decider for personal happiness and worth? MAYBE it's actually all about who you are as a person on the inside or something?

Obviously i wish Zeb Wells no ill will, but this is the Marvel Universe he's writing, not the Raimiverse.

I'm pretty sure the first time Peter met Norman was as the Green Goblin and Peter didn't see Norman's true face until ASM Vol. 1 #37 (1966). Also, the only time Norman saw Peter as his "son" was in Peter Parker: Spider-Man Vol. 1 #25 (2000) where he tortures him both physically and psychologically for 2 days so Peter can become his Goblin protégé.

Nick Spencer has done a decent job for put a stop to that moment about Norman ever being a father figure to Peter in AMS Vol. 5 #57 (2018).

So nah dude, i'm not buying this moment.

[from the Amazing Spider-Man Vol. 6 #32 (August 23, 2023) by Zeb Wells (script), Patrick Gleason (pencils & inks), Marcio Menyz (colors) and VC's Joe Caramagna (letters)]

271 notes · View notes

hellzyeahthewebwieldingavenger · 5 months

Text

Peter would NEVER think this. He'd never believe that the 'real Norman' is anything other than exactly the guy he has known all these years.

Peter was literally put in a machine which made him experience Norman's memories from Norman's POV. He saw what shaped Norman into a monster, but also that Norman displayed psychopathic tendencies even as a child, such as killing his dog. His father was an alcoholic, Harry was a drug addict. Norman is a power addict.

Norman might have turned out differently if he'd grown up in a different environment, but the fact is he didn't. He is and always was a piece of shit sadistic monster. Peter isn't going to write off ALL of the truely heinous things Norman has done to both him and his loved ones.

Moreover, as the OP pointed out, Norman and Peter's 'father-son' relationship was only explicit in 2000. Before that, whilst you could argue Norman on some level di always see Peter as the son he always wanted, Peter never looked upon Norman as a father figure. Norman as a dark father figure to Peter has always been symbollic and thematic in so far as Norman is a father and defined by that attribute to a large extent, therefore in fighting him Peter is fighting the anti-Uncle Ben. It didn't mean he was his personal anti-Uncle Ben though.

The fact Wells doesn't know this speaks to either his honestly unforgivable lack of knowledge on Spider-Man (this isn't deep lore, it is within the first 50-100 issues of Stan Lee's run, basic shit) or that he honestly doesn't give a shit.

I personally think it is a combination of both.

Zeb Wells was never qualified to write for Spider-Man. Ever.

His one and only good Spider-Man story was an issue of an anthology comic book during the early-mid 2000s which wasn't even about Spider-Man, it was about J. Jonah Jameson.

Back then Wells was the fill in guy. He was busted out whenever there was a gap in the regular writing team or there was a mini or one shot that needed writing. He was never anyone's first choice and frankly his work was at best mediocre. Usually it was simply bad.

And that was all BEFORE he wrote the ultimate character evisceration of the Lizard in the form of 'Shed', a story so awful even Dan Slott ecognised he needed to do some repair work on it. It took THREE stories to get the Lizard in any kind of working order as a character and even then that is debatable.

In that story Wells had Spidey surprised the Lizard could talk, something that the character had been doing since literally his first ever appearance in the early 1960s. That is how bad Zeb Wells is.

This man has been an utter clown where Spider-Man is concerned for literally over 20 years. The fact that he was dusted off and allowed to take point during the post-Spencer era and then become the main writer I think speaks to Marvel's desperation more than anything.

Along with dusting off Ben Reilly as Peter's glorified understudy it is just weird.

I honestly think that there was some behind-the-scenes drama involved with Spencer's departure and then combined with the mainstream comic book industry (entirely justifiably) dying it resulted in few writers even wanting to write for Spider-Man in the first place. Wells was thus the last resort option.

Obviously i wish Zeb Wells no ill will, but this is the Marvel Universe he's writing, not the Raimiverse.

Nick Spencer has done a decent job for put a stop to that moment about Norman ever being a father figure to Peter in AMS Vol. 5 #57 (2018).

So nah dude, i'm not buying this moment.

[from the Amazing Spider-Man Vol. 6 #32 (August 23, 2023) by Zeb Wells (script), Patrick Gleason (pencils & inks), Marcio Menyz (colors) and VC's Joe Caramagna (letters)]

271 notes · View notes