Spidey is assigned to substitute teach for the members of the AVENGERS ACADEMY. But when the PSYCHO-MAN interrupts them on patrol, the school of Hard Knocks quickly becomes a game of life and death!”
“The Substitute” part one
Written by Christos Gage
Illustrated by Reilly Brown
Inked by Victor Olazaba
Colored by John Raunch
Lettered by VC’s Joe Caramagna
Cover art by Ed McGuinness and Morry Hollowell
“Just Another Day”
Written by Paul Benjamin
Illustrated by Javier Pulido
Assistant Editor: Ellie Pyle
Senior Editor: Stephen Wacker
Editor in Chief: Axel Alonso
Chief Creative Officer: Joe Quesada
Publisher: Dan Buckley
Executive Producer: Alan Fine
THE PLOT(s): Giant Man approaches one of the Future Foundation to substitute for the Avengers Academy class in superheroing. Spider-Man volunteers on the basis that he used to teach and misses teaching. Throughout the class, Spider-Man’s previous doubts are realized when the students don’t take as well to the training course as he’d hoped. In the backup, Peter has a typical day as Spider-Man.
LONG STORY SHORT: The Psycho-Man reveals himself to be behind Spidey’s doubts. Though Spider-Man overcomes them, the Psycho-Man then has the brainwashed Avengers Academy kids attack the webslinger.
MY THOUGHTS: One of the biggest problems, if not the biggest problem I have with the new direction of Amazing Spider-Man is that, more often than not, characters and situations will be elevated at the expense of our main protagonist. Single or not, what offended me the most with Brand New Day and some of Big Time is that the character of Spider-Man was seemingly reduced to an ineffectual, inexperienced whiner who was by and large a shade of his pre-2008 self. It wasn’t a central shift in characterization meant to be recognized as a new form of Spider-Man. Rather, the sense from both the writers of the book and the characters surrounding Peter Parker’s world is that he’s always been like that. A comment here, a goofed up execution in heroics there, it all became too much to the point where I repeatedly kept dropping the book after disappointment being my only reward for giving it another chance.
Conversely, progression is one of the central themes Dan Slott has employed in his Big Time run that many of us are praising. The re-introduction of Peter Parker’s ingenuity, gumption and determination were welcomed along with Slott’s overflowing bucket of continuity references with open arms. This is what fans have said they want to see in Spidey’s comic: A proud acknowledgment of the past while Peter Parker ushers forth toward the future with the same characteristics as he’s always had.
For the most part. Kinda.
This issue has me at a crossroads in that I’m not sure if it is endorsing one aspect of Peter Parker or another. It all depends on how you analyze the plot. Essentially, the Psycho-Man is said to have been playing on the fears of Spider-Man, making him doubtful of his own capabilities and resentful that the other heroes don’t acknowledge it. This has all been revealed after we get most of an issue with Spider-Man constantly whining about being a teacher, not sure if he can hack teaching the Avengers Academy kids, and generally displaying a real lack of self esteem. But the idea, if I’m understanding this correctly, is that the Psycho-Man is behind it all.
I am not very familiar with the Psycho-Man. I do not know how much of his power is sustained for a long period of time, or if he needs to be consciously affecting people, or if he can just *POOF* out a spell and people will feel negative emotions or not. So the crux of the plot really hinges on how this works in the issue. Admittedly this is a fault of mine as a reviewer and a reader for not being familiar with the character, but then again it’s the fault of the writer (Christos Gage this time ’round as opposed to “Dandy” Dan Slott who’s apparently off working on Spider-Island) for not informing me of the guy in the first place.
That’s the thing with exposition in this title, it picks and chooses who, when and what to explain. It works to varying degrees as well. For instance, I know why and when Spider-Man lost his Spider-Sense, but it doesn’t hurt to inform new readers to the event whenever Peter thinks about it. Similarily, I appreciated learning who the Avengers Academy members were and what they could do as I’ve never read their books. Now I question why not indulging the reader with information on the Psycho-Man when everything was was all but spelled out. I understand that he’s a long-time F4 villain, and if he needs to be explained then why not go ahead and explain who Giant-Man is as well but it does present a definite problem. Without knowing what exactly the Psycho-Man can do, I’m left not really sure if Spider-Man was under his influence or not during the issue.
Consider ASM #658 where the child members of the Future Foundation talk about how much of a immature man-child Spider-Man is. That rings as so annoying off the mark that it’s a prime example of why I would repeatedly drop the title. I, among many other people, do not like being told in the story that our hero is a lame human being. Besides all the decades of stories and examples where he’s proven that he’s anything but, it also just rings as needlessly cynical, as though we need to like Spider-Man because he sucks or something. A lot of us must have missed that memo, but whatever, it’s in the issue and now part of the series.
Now consider the page preceding the Letter’s Column:
Praise is issued to Slott, giving the impression that Slott’s solo run on the title has resurrected it from a state of badness or plain blandness, or even just that his run is a lot better than those that have gone before him. Other writers don’t necessarily have to have bad runs for Slott’s run to be good.
But another interesting thing to note is a letter by one Ritchie Tiongson.
“I won’t go into detail about how much I hated the whole BND idea. It’s sufficient to say I’m one of those who hated it with my very soul…It felt to me like Peter had regressed…Then several months ago, I read a web article about Dan Slott taking over AMAZING and his ideas for Big Time. Everything in that article sang to me…My Spidey was back. I haven’t missed an issue since.”
This isn’t to suggest that Marvel wouldn’t print letters that would say anything negative regarding anything they’ve done in the past. At the same time it’s getting across the notion that Dan Slott knows the character of Spider-Man in ways that the previous writers off the past few years did not. And what’s being suggested along with that notion is that the writers didn’t get the character of Spider-Man because they wrote him in a state that was characteristically regressive to what is once was.
So in this issue, we have two sides of the same coin. We have a very self-doubting, angsty Spider-Man contrasted with a very determined, proactive Spider-Man. I love the way he takes down Psycho-Man, fighting through the fear and doubt because that’s exactly who he is. But as cool as that was, as much as I’d love to give Gage credit for writing Spider-Man the way I and many others want him to be written, it’s still very odd that this was presented to us as a Spider-Man who when acting like he has in the past BND era may as well have been acting under the influence of a mind-controlling super villain. It rings as dishonest to the writers who wrote him before, and while I would very much like to be under the assumption that every time Spider-Man has been written out of character in the past it was due to a super villain, the fact is that it’s not what Marvel wanted to get across to the readers. From the Breevort Manifesto to panels with Joe Quesada at conventions, we’ve been given the impression that Spider-Man is exactly what those writers wrote him as, which was less than favorable in the eyes of everyone around him in the context of the comic. Now he’s all of a sudden written to be above that. The problem is that while characters can be written in different ways by different writers, the fact that a story seemingl goes out of its way to portray one of those ways as false is just outright disingenuous to the writers that came before. Do you see what I’m getting at?
Getting into the particulars about the issue, I really liked the artwork by Reilly Brown. It was simple and clean, and I liked how he drew Spider-Man’s mask. It’s along the lines of how I approach the design of the mask in my own artwork and I thought he pulled it off better than I do. (which isn’t hard admittedly) As for the back-up, I liked it fine for what it was. “Just Another Day” is basically a ‘Nuff Said story and it was nice and entertaining in providing some vignettes about a day in the life of Spider-Man. Nothing incredible, but special in its own small way.
In first reading this issue, I was ready to really hate it due to the preview. After all, Spidey’s never had problems teaching kids back when he was a teacher, so why start now. I really thought Gage was going for an inexperienced, doofus Spider-Man. But with the revelation of why he may have been acting that way, I ended up really enjoying the issue. But going back and thinking about it, there is a very real cognitive dissonance in how Spider-Man is being presented to the masses and to the readers. I’m going to grade this issue a .5 less than what I would have liked to grade it purely on confusion alone. Hopefully it’ll all make more sense after the next issue.
3.5/5 webs.
Apple Podcasts
Google Podcasts
Spotify
Pandora
Amazon Music
iHeartRadio
Podbean
Amazon Alexa
Player.fm
Listen Notes
Stitcher
Good review, don’t know that mentioning the add was really needed as it’s jut an add that is in a bunch of Marvel books this week promoting an upcoming Spider-man event…..seems pretty standard practice to me, but otherwise very well done.
Personally, I thought this was pretty good, I don’t know much about Avengers Academy but that did not put a damper on the story for me or make it hard to read at all. As for Carly and her ever changing look, that is just what happens when you have so many artists working on a book….personally I don’t like Carly as a character anyways so her look changing doesn’t bother me as much as her character does, but I can see where that is coming from.
It’s sad when I see the comment count on a book review and can instantly tell what’s going on…
While I certainly don’t want to deter the number of comments blowing up or passioned discussions with the book’s editor, let’s try not to make this into a Holy War alright pimps? Not speaking to the majority, but the ever-present minority.
@44… oh Steve, you just love putting the worm on the hook don’t you
I guess as long as you have a sense of humor about it…
Does anybody else think that the last page of this issue was poking fun at all the “Hate, hate, hate” we’ve been seeing?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1N5p8IXzNdc
I didn’t realize that add that was scanned in this review was part of a multi-page add for an upcoming story. That makes more sense to me. I’ll come up with a different complaint when it is sufficient to HAUNT you, Steve (I’m reading K-boxes blog, he’s out to HAUNT you, you know…It might be the fact that I’ve slept a total of 17 hours in the past four days, but something about that HAUNTING line makes me chuckle).
Well I’ve never seen em but then again I don’t live in US of A
43-Incorrect. They run ads with quotes from reviews from TV critics. This is quite the tempest in a teacup.
Anyway, for those of you really, really mad, don’t forget to visit:
http://box-in-the-box.livejournal.com/506376.html
SW
There’s advertising upcoming attractions in the own magazine and then there’s printing praise of stuff the readers already read.
When I’m reading Green Lantern I see ads for “War Of The GL every issue” but i don’t see anything resembling praise for what i just read. Likewise on the cover of hack/slash or some marvel comics that under preform I see good review excerpts to try and convince the average reader to pick it up just as you would at the back of the novel but again, nothing inside the cover.
Finally to use Wackers example I’m pretty sure when House airs a promo for next weeks episode it airs footage for the next weeks episode like the 2 page promo found in FBCD/.1 issue and doesn’t just list off a bunch of positive quotes in a attempt to get us to tune in because we’ve already tuned in, the way to get us to stay tuned in is to tempt us with what is in store next week, not tell us how awesome what we’re reading is. At least I’ve never seen a tv ad do that, and I watch a hell of a lot of tv.
Quick question to Wacker, why does your name keep changing? Stephen Wacker, stephen wacker, Stephen wacker, you should stick with one before a conspiracy starts 😛
@Donovan, surprising I’d give it a 3/5, and I love the characters from Academy, as opposed to your 3.5/5 and you barely knowing them. It really felt like someone else was writing them this issue for me, which is weird, since Gage is the man writing AA. It may be because we’re seeing the events through Parker’s eyes though. I just thought the book had a strong opening and slowly faded to average. Great review, thanks for the insightful look.
I understand.
s
I said that you seem to have an answer for everything. I never said they were particularly insightful answers. Your above comment illustrates this beautifully 🙂
To assume that my comment was solely in regards to this thread or even to one particular comment within this thread; means that you entirely missed my point, are incredibly shortsighted, are purposely being dismissive because you have no thoughtful retort, or some combination of the three.
Regardless, a continuously feed fire will never die. I’ve said my piece and I thank you for your consideration, but there’s simply no sense getting into an e-battle about this. If thoughtful discussion can’t persuade you that things are in disarray in ASM, perhaps a significant enough hit to the bottom line will. The last stand of the consumer is simply not to buy a product they are dissatisfied with. If money talks, losing money climbs up to the highest mountain and screams. Declining sales will produce more change than a thousand 100+ comment threads ever could.
“I seem to have an answert for everything” is a pretty funny. complaint.
I was asked a question about my job and I answered. Me knowing what I think is now a criticism too?
Anyway, I suspect I’m not quite as dopey as the picture you paint.
SW
If only SW put in half as much effort/thought into the book, as he does here on crawlspace….
I’m reminded of a kid I used to TA while finishing my masters. He would consistently submit sub-par, obviously rushed work. He would then proceed to challenge and petition each (low) mark he received for weeks at a time. If the kid had put that much effort into the work originally, it would have saved everyone a lot of trouble and headaches.
Despite how my comment may sound, this isn’t meant to be a jab at SW and I’m not suggesting the work is rushed. I respect your point of view and your right to defend of your work, even if I don’t agree with your assessments.
However, you seem to have an answer for everything. Perhaps you could anticipate at least some of the potential complaints of the inquiring/critical minds (read: plot holes) and address them within the book/before publishing, as oppose to after the fact.
Now I’m just a lowly student, but I was always taught to ask myself questions like, “Am I actually saying what I want to say?” Or, “Does my writing make sense?” Or even, “Is what I’m writing now consistent with my previous work, and if not, why not?” Or my personal favorite, “How would an opposing point of view see the work?” This last self-reflective question would have proved especially useful in regards to the GG tattoo, but let’s just call a spade a spade and recognize it as a cheap ploy to get us to buy the following issue…which, of course, I did 😛
Finally, your House analogy falls flat. If I put on an episode of House I will very likely see an advertisement for next week’s episode. Hell, I may even be told that this season is generating Emmy buzz. But I’ve never once seen a full 30-60 second commercial praising the writer/director as a savior. What you did with that page was laughable, but I didn’t expect you to say anything negative against it (and you haven’t)
Anyways, my $0.02. Keep up the good work, Don. Appreciate the effort and the point of view.
@#9 Thanks for the compliment, and it does make me feel better that the Psycho Man stuff was forshadowed apparently.
And I didn’t state that in the next page they advertised Spider-Island, but I don’t think that it negates the point of what I was trying to make with the discussion of the page.
I meant to mention Carlie’s hair and its inconsistency, but since Wacker says as long as she has glasses and blondish hair it doesn’t matter, I suppose there’s not much else to say. I and others don’t really like that cavalier attitude towards character designs, but I suppose there’s not much else to say about it.
I’m all for different artists interpretations on Carlie but it’s not like we saw Norman with long hair one issue and blond the next. I like Carlie and I really hope they stick with a particular look, I like her better with short hair and freckles btw.
@30 – You posted that response while I was typing my question. So, yeah, thanks, I guess.
And no scans, it didn’t happen, then.
@33 – me? grown up? that’s preposterous… i do read comics much more critically now as an adult, but i can still be as immature as always 🙂
and I agree, I am not against her screen time, it’d be kind of hard to write her as Peter’s girlfriend if she wasn’t around as much. His relationships and the girls he is in them with are as much a part of the story as his mask in my opinion. And that is why there are so many people who take this matter so seriously.
I have no problems with Carlie, I do think the tattoo was in poor judgement on her part, but I wish her the best as a character for the most part and hope we get some more interesting in depth looks at her
I suspect she gets screen time because she’s in Pete’s supporting cast and is dating him. That’s the way the book has always worked. It’s the story of Peter Parker’s life.
And let’ be honest, ultimately every supporting character has been “pushed” on you. You’ve just grown up and can now see the strings at the puppet show.
SW
@29 Two-Bit… interesting, I’m sure they’ll collect it in a TPB at some point so perhaps I’ll read through it at my local B&N bookstore when it comes out. I do like me some good character development
@27 – Fair enough about enjoying the wide range of artists interpretations. It’s why I set up the Webs Weekly segment because I like seeing how other people view characters. And I agree, everyone here, and you, and most readers know that she is supposed to be Carlie Cooper because A) she’s always around it seems and B) she’s called out by name… I think the main complaint isn’t that we’re confused as to who this character is, it’s ‘why is she not consistently drawn the same way from one issue to the next’ and why does she not have a defined look yet. How can she “look enough like Carlie” when we’re not entirely sure what Carlie is supposed to look like. Anybody who is new to the book may have trouble adjusting to that and getting used to her as a character. It’s more important to some people than to others it would appear (not a slight at you). If you are OK with letting it go as it is and letting the artists have a free run at her appearance, why I personally may have a problem with it, at least you let me know that you are aware of it and you are OK with your talent having their own take on her.
I don’t think there’s anything nefarious behind the Carlie promoting (besides of course my ultimate theory on her character) but it does seem like she is getting a lot of screen time and a push as the “perfect girl” for Peter so it just seems like you guys do want us to like her.
I did give an honest answer.
And sorry, I’m not going to scan a bunch of old comics for ya. I’ll just stand by my opinion.
SW
@Brian – No, dude. You owe it to yourself to check out Avengers Academy. If you can, try to get a hold of the first six issues. Each one is a character study on each individual cadet of the Avengers Academy, and they are all messed up in their own unique way. I’m still kicking myself for dropping it (money issues).
@Donovan – Thanks for mentioning the Spidey ad, so I don’t have to in my Avengers review. Just a little clarification: it’s actually TWO full page ads: one with the quotes, and the other promoting ASM #666. While I did find it annoying (it’s in ALL Marvel books that came out this week), I don’t blame Marvel for patting themselves in the back. In fact, I EXPECT them to. And, also, they gave shoutouts to some of my favorite reviewers.
Brian’s got a point with the emphasis on the ad. This is like Gerard with the barcode in the Human Torch memorial issue. But other than that, good review as always.
@Stephen Wacker – The question about Carlie’s varying looks from story to story is a valid one. I wish you would give an honest answer instead of your usual sarcasm. Besides, when did MJ’s look go through drastic changes? Scans or it didn’t happen.
Basically, As long as she enough looks like Carlie, I’m fine. I like what the different artists bring to the table (and for better or worse I get to indulge my wide ranging artistic tastes).
No one who’s bringing it up is legitimately confused, it’s just this year’s model of complaints.
And to the suggestion we’re “trying really hard to promote Carlie”, that’s just a message board fiction. We just tell stories and she’s in them. Nothing is as nefarious as you read from some here.
SW
@14 Jignat – Cyclops is on the variant cover because they’re doing a series of variants for several of their comics that feature the X-Men through the ages in their different looks and costumes. The variants don’t necessarily have to have anything to do with the issue they’re on, like when they did their Tron variants to help promote the Tron movie and how they did the Thor goes Hollywood variants just recently.
I actually looked at all the X-Men through the ages variant covers art work and thought they were pretty cool but am not a big variant cover guy so I would never pick them up.
@21 SW – You say they’re under artistic license, so are you saying that you’re telling the artists there is no guide to how she can look? It just says “she can have long hair or short hair, make it red or brunette… and hey, if you’d like to add freckles, go for it?” Why not have a more defined look for such an “important” character now?
Carlie’s ever-changing appearance isn’t something I hate. It’s really more of a minor annoyance at this point and I was legitimately curious if her look was something that you’d brought up with the artists. To be honest, though, what really aggravates me about the book is how the characters and their actions don’t ring true anymore. The fact that Spider-Man’s continuity has been gutted bothers me quite a bit as well.
While I thought the full page ad was jarring and not necessary, I took it for what it was… a business move to hype up the flagship title. Whether it was because they acknowledge Spidey is not doing as hot as they’d like, or if it’s just simply because they’re trying to give credit to Dan Slott since he’s the first “solo” writer since the BND team of writers, we’ll never know. Marvel doesn’t owe us the answers to all their inside secrets and business decisions, and I don’t think Wacker would have much to say on the advertisement side of the business to begin with anyway. It’s silly sure, but I don’t think it should be the main focus of the comic, no more than the double page spread of the game Brink, which is only there for a business standpoint as well. And from what I’ve heard, that game is pretty much a let down, so damn you Marvel for promoting such a disappointing game. If the use of ad space is the biggest complaint, then in my opinion, that’s not a bad thing at all in the long run.
I do agree on the varying appearances of Carlie though, Steve. I thought there were guidelines established for characters in the comics… Peter Parker has to have this color hair, these color eyes, he’s a Mets fan not a Yankees fan… why is there not a Carlie guide established yet for the artists to follow in order to keep her consistent from one issue to the next? She’s a character you guys are trying really hard to promote and by not giving her a firm look you are taking away a lot from her character. I know different artists have different styles and interpretations, but the different hair length and color, the freckles and all that doesn’t gel together well. I feel this is a valid complaint. Maybe there’s some deeper meaning behind that we have yet to discover, but in the meantime it’s really distracting.
How old is JQ’s daughter Carlie? Maybe they’re giving the character so many different looks because they’re not sure how his daughter will look when she’s older and they just want to cover all their bases 🙂
Wacker while we have you….I noticed a brunette working at the Bugle in Spider-Man: Fear Itself 1. Is that suppose to be Betty working at the Bugle again? Curious
Tiger, those details are safely under artistic license. MJ would go through much more drastic changes from issue to issue back in the 80s and 90s.
C’mon there’s many more reasons to hate the book than that! I mean, just remember all the raping we “showed”!
SW
As I type, I’m watching a cable news show and just saw an ad for that very same cable news show.
SW
I know Carlie had long hair last issue and short hair in the most recent one. I also know that she had freckles a few issues back, but they’re gone now.
No book is selling as well it was a few years ago…particularly during Civil War. To ignore that is to ignore a lot. Plus you have no idea of Marvel’s costs and profit.
And as Stillanerd can tell you, those Statements of Ownership aren’t what you think they are and they aren’t as reliable as you want them to be. They never have been.
The Carle complaint is just the current convenient complaint. It’s nonsense…but i suspect you know that.
SW
Stephen, I recognize that Amazing Spider-Man still performs well in regards to other comics on the market, but even Marvel’s own statement of ownership numbers tell us that the book isn’t selling nearly as well as it was just a few years ago. Other numbers suggest that a significant percentage of the readership abandoned the title in the wake of One More Day and people continued to walk away throughout the Brand New Day era. Is this data erroneous? Has the book been selling better than ever and Marvel just decided to keep that information to itself? I’d honestly love to know.
By the way, while I’ve got you here, could you tell me why you continue to allow ASM to go to print with Carlie Cooper looking like a completely different character in almost every issue that she appears in? Have you spoken to your artists about this at all? It just seems to me like her look is something that you guys should have decided upon over 100 issues ago.
Heh, I think the distinction I’m really missing is that we shouldn’t be promoting a proven failure like the current Spidey comics.
We promoted the next real “jumping on” point. This really isn’t unusual…particularly with way comics are marketed and casually read.
SW
Wacker, you are missing the distinction between an ad that’s meant to hype you up for a specific upcoming episode and one that generally talks about the reception past episodes have gotten, and the one between review quotes at the first page of the book and ones buried near the end where only people who have read the book will find it. I’m sure there is a valid reason for it but to me it comes across as you trying to talk people into having a certain opinion at that pivotal point when the reader has finished the work but has not yet independently formed his or her thoughts on it.
Hey guys It’s my first time posting on crawlspace.
I think its neat there are actual dialogue bubbles on a modern comic. You dont see that everyday.
Also, why is Cyclops on the variant cover?
As for the advertising complaints, I’m afraid the norms of modern publicity have decided you are wrong.
SW
Jack, I think by definition there’s only one of us that have facts of any sort. Made up sales graphs aren’t really knowledge.
And I’m old enought to remember back last month or so when the complaint about me here was that I wasn’t corporate enough! Man, times change.
SW
Wish you would oppose things that people are actually saying, SW, instead of making stuff up. The standard claim by critics is that ASM has lost a huge chunk of its audience. And it has. But I forgot that it all depends on what “is” means with you corporate suit guys.
IMO, the product itself creates the buzz. You don’t need that kind of advertising, at least not in the thing itself. I maybe could see Marvel running ads like that for ASM in other entertainment magazines or websites, like a banner at IGN.
Tiger: the “Spidey isn’t selling” meme is sort of past its expiration point. No one’s buying it–even here there’s trouble selling that idea. At this point it’s like debating the moon landing.
SW
To the commenters: Yeah! Why do magazines advertise themselves IN THEIR OWN MAGAZINE!?!?! How come during House, I see ads for next week House (which includes comments from critics)? Why do I see reviews for a novel on the INSIDE pages on the same novel? Marvel must have secretly invented advertising and promotion! It’s madness! If Marvel had balls, they’d only run reviews from people who hate the book…like every other slice of media does!
Anyway, nice review (Though I do miss the other guy.) Some of the Psycho Man stuff was briefly set up a few issues ago, by the way.
SW
That ad with the quotes was actually published in other Marvel comics as well. The thing is, though, they’re not promoting an upcoming issue or event. They’re simply promoting Amazing Spider-Man, which I’ll remind you is a series that everyone who reads comics is well aware of. Obviously a full page ad like this would better serve a lesser-known title. So why devote the space to ASM? Well, maybe someone at Marvel took a look at the numbers and realized that Spidey isn’t selling quite like he should be.
What’s the point of putting a page of review quotes INSIDE a comic book, where presumably the only people who will see it are those who have already bought the book? And its at the end, right before the letters page, where only people who have ALREADY read it will see it. They’re trying to RETROACTIVELY convince the readers that what they JUST READ was awesome.
It’s like if Kenneth Branagh stood outside a the theater and, as people walked out at the end, he started elbowing them in the ribs and said “that was great, huh? Time magazine and Entertainment Weekly think it’s great! Want me to name more people who thought it was great? There are more! You thought it was great. I AM TELLING YOU THAT YOU THOUGHT IT WAS GREAT! You can’t wait for Thor 2, can you? Huh? HUH? Are you listening?”
spidey has not been very good lately. hope spider island is better but i am very much not thinking it will be. love carlies spidey tat though. LOL!
Very evenhanded review, which deftly addresses Marvel’s deeply schizophrenic mindset about Spider-Man since “One More Day” — they refuse to admit to making any mistakes since the start of “Brand New Day,” and yet, their whole sales pitch for Dan Slott essentially amounts to “Spider-Man doesn’t suck anymore, the way that he did during BND!” — but I do see an omission in your reading, which is the conversation between Spider-Man and the students at the start of the issue. For as much as Christos Gage tried to sell us on Spider-Man as a worthy hero later on in the issue, neither Gage nor Spider-Man ever really responded to the students’ very valid criticisms of Spider-Man’s approach to superheroism (or at least, the retro-Silver Age approach to the same to which Slott and his fellow “brain trust” writers regressed the character during BND), which is all the more troublesome because Tom Brevoort’s “Spider-Man Manifesto” flatly stated that Spider-Man should be YOUNG, first and foremost, and yet, this story goes out of its way to make the character seem OLD and out-of-touch with the trends and realities of these hip and with-it kids of today, which was supposedly what necessitated the entire Mephisto marriage retcon in the first place. Either Spider-Man NEEDS to be young, in which case he can’t be allowed to be this clueless about the modern generation, or else he DOESN’T, in which case Marvel can’t justify retconning his marriage and maturity with OMD, BND and “One Moment In Time.”
Also? Taking out a full-page house ad to try and convince the people who have already picked up this issue that this title is worth reading smacks of desperation much more than pride, but as long as Marvel has decided to grant legitimacy to the opinions of online reviewers, here’s what the reviewers at Comic Book Resources, Comic Book Revolution, Comic Vine, Crave Online and Newsarama (all of whom Marvel has deemed worth listening to), as well as a few other sites, had to say about Carlie Cooper in Amazing Spider-Man #660:
http://box-in-the-box.livejournal.com/506349.html
Here’s a hint: They didn’t care for her, nor for the conclusion of the tattoo subplot of which she was such a key part. 🙂
And just in case Spider-Man editor Stephen Wacker decides to troll this review like he did the last one? I will not be responding to you here, Steve, because Donovan doesn’t deserve you derailing his thread any more than Gerard did, so you can either reply to me on my own blog, or else not at all:
http://box-in-the-box.livejournal.com/506376.html
I’m sad to see Gerard go, but I look forward to reading many more of your reviews, Donovan. 🙂
Good review, Don. One other thing about the issue that also struck me odd that I mentioned over on the forums (and not just the fact that not only is Carlie Cooper’s hair a different color, length, and style than it was last issue, but also in this issue’s back-up story). When Peter, under the influence of Psycho Man, thinks how Marla and Uncle Ben’s deaths are his fault, he doesn’t mention Gwen Stacy. Marla I can sort of get since that’s the most recent death, and Uncle Ben is a no-brainer. But to not mention Gwen? The woman he loved and arguably would have married had she lived and not murdered by his arch-enemy, the Green Goblin? That just seems weird to me, especially since Gwen’s death is a far more clear-cut example to use than Marla’s for showing Spidey feeling guilty about a death he feels he could have prevented. Oh well..
How good can a book really be when you need to waste a full page to remind readers that not everyone thinks it’s awful? And by the way, Marvel, “the critics have spoken” and a large number of them have been very critical of your vision of Spider-Man. I guess you’ve just got a bad case of selective hearing.
Also, I found every single one of those Avengers Academy characters uninspiring and kind of lame… glad I’m not reading that title.
I got the impression that the self doubt and fear only started when they stopped that mugging and Psycho-Man presented himself. None of the other characters in the story really displayed those fears or doubts until then as well, so why would he only have singled out Spidey early on.
The ad featuring the critics reviews (what no crawlspace quotes???) was kind of annoying but obviously they just picked the quotes that spoke to what they were trying to do… get people on board with Spider-Man again. Same thing they do with the letters I’m sure. Yeah, they have some negative stuff in there, but obviously they’ll try to highlight the positive to get readers excited.
No mention of Carlie’s new/old look again in this issue? Maybe we’re just Carlied out at this point… I loved the art in this issue, the back up not so much… and why in the backup was his list of things to do ever changing? (Carlie with a different look in the back up as well, might I add)
Good review, and with the quickness too no less. More focus on the actual comic and less on the ads and reviews though next time please :), but I understand the point you were trying to make.