And now, a small tribute to the 1990s

Today I am 31

So just enjoy the random bits of goodness while I enjoy the day, ok?

Your Moment of Funny

Couple of Downer points

Downer Thought#1:

You know, as much as I am for Spider-Man's marriage to Mary Jane, and as absolutely stupid as I think the retcon and all it has yeilded is, I don't think there's much point anymore. My guess is that whatever Spider-fans left with the marriage are either out of comics entirely (the most likely case) or like myself, have gravitated increasingly towards comics that don't insult their intelligence and sensibilities (i.e. Love and Capes). So, if there were to bring back the marriage now, most likely the other half of the fans would drop away and no one would replace them.

Well, at least in the short term - this was the logic that kept Hal Jordan from coming back for almost a decade, and we know how that turned out.

OK, are there really any good corporate super-comics with strong female protagonists that don't have any creepy subtexts or really cheesecake art out there? I'm thinking there's Spider-Girl, and.....I've heard pretty good things about the new Batgirl series (sorta).

Anything?

More than a Reason

So, Spider-Man's Wedding. Let's talk about that story for a second.



A lot of people have over the years commented that it's not a very romantic story, and they're not wrong for point that out. However, I'd make the arguement that rather than a romantic story, the wedding story is an interesting showcase of Peter Parker and Mary Jane's characters, and an unintentional (or intentional?) subversion of a few of the comic wedding tropes.

OK, so the general criticism leveled at the actual wedding story is that it's a long story about Peter Parker and Mary Jane Watson exploring every reason and excuse not to get married, and then they do it anyways.

Point the first - I think it's safe to say that any young couple has doubts about getting married; they may not always involve a cabal of killers who dress like circus clowns, but they probably have reasons. So I think it's normal, even realistic, that when making a decision, the reasons for not doing it would pop up rather frequently. The important thing to note, is that yeah, they say "screw the odds, I'm doing something for me because I want it." is a very human thing to do - if people aren't willing to take risks for something they want, then they don't lead very exciting lives to begin with. They sure as hell ain't heroes.

Point the second - This is very much Peter Parker's character shining through. This is a guy who has taken on more responsibility than any reasonable or sane person could since he was in high school. The fact that he's managed to keep so much successfully on his shoulders for so long (with only a very few slip ups over the years) is a testament to his integrity, brillance and sheer stubborn will. So of course, Peter's going to go through the worst case scenarios involved in the possibility of marriage - his life has had more than his fair share of troubles. And it's just as natural for him to go for it, to take the risks. After all, he puts his life on the line every day without a thought of any kind of reward or even thanks, and he rarely if ever has anything to show for his personal life, so it makes sense. Never underestimate the human desire to raise up its middle finger at fate and say "Fuck you, I'm going for this, and you and entropy and the universe can go suck it."

Point the final - this book quickly eliminates the decades old "But if I get married, my enemies will try to get to me through them!" gimmick. Let's think logically for a second - if you take this line of thinking to its conclusion, then any given superhero should just give up their 'normal' lives, disown their families, and never make a meaningful connection with another human being ever again. And even if that insane course were persued, it still wouldn't work. You think Captain Killsalot gives a crap that you haven't spoken to your mother in eight years? He's a crazed killer, I don't think he's really that up or interested in your personal dynamics. If an insane lunatic ends up striking at a hero, they aren't going to see much distinction between current and ex-girlfriends or estranged and close family - they are just out to hurt you. Soooooo, I don't buy that logic, and I'm glad that in this comic, it's pretty handily dismissed.

Pity it didn't stick.

Comic Couples: No introduction Required

You know what? Just read any of my other rants on this subject, it's pretty well covered there.

However, the short version.

Mary Jane is:

-compatible with Peter because they've both had to make difficult choices about responsibility, they both have a biting and wicked sense of humor, and they even so much as have some common interests.

-a character in her own right, and not just support

-someone who uses her 'fun' persona to mask her own problems and insecurities

-aware of what Peter does and that he does it not out of some obsession with trying to fix the past or atonement.

Peter:

-sees a woman who is so many things at once and balances them all in a way that takes so much effort for him

-doesn't have one tenth of the ability to be as comfortable in his own skin as Mary Jane does

-knows that Mary Jane is the stronger one because of all this, and inspires him to try to do better

Done for now.

Brand New Day - Two Years Later

Today we'll quickly look over the last two years of Spider-Man under the editorially-mandated "Brand New Day" which saw Peter trade his marriage to the Devil and a whole new status quo, which is really just the early 1980s status quo. I'm just going focus on a few facets of the stories as they were presented and reactions.

-Jackpot: Holy Hell was this an epic clusterfuck. A "mystery" with no real clues, and a solution that left me going "Who cares?" rather than "Ok, that's cool".

-The Parker Luck: I think the writers are confused by this one - it's not that bad shit happens to Peter because bad shit happens to him or it's funny (I'm looking at you, Waid). The "Parker Luck" is an attempt at irony - bad things happen to Peter (late for a date, can't get his homework done) as a direct consequence of something GOOD he does as Spider-Man. It's a really easy way of relating to the character ("Well, Debbie thinks I'm a deadbeat, but I saved that busload of Nuns from being fried by Electro! The old Parker Luck strikes again, I suppose.") that I think the writers are grossly misusing.

-Flash Thompson: Either this is going to get retconned or made into an albatross by the writers. Neither of which is good.

-The New Villains: Look, I tried, and I honestly wanted to like these new guys, and a few of them even look like the creators put a lot of effort into them (i.e. Mr. Negative). The problem here is that because of the choppy nature of the format - with the writer relay going off every month - there's no momentum of the story to begin exploring the character of these villains as they show up, then go away, and then they show up in another arc a few months later and lather, rinse and repeat. Hell, in the worst case (again, Mr. Negative), their entire arc is shuffled out of the book and into some side miniseries? Fuck that noise - that kills any interest I have in learning about the character.

-The new supporting cast: See the villains.

-Aunt May and Jonah Senior: I'm not the first to say it, but it's really rather creepy that everyone else in the supporting cast is moving forward in their lives at a breakneck pace while Peter is perpetually stuck in time. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the whole point of the "Marvel Age" when they first started was that they weren't going to become static unchanging and unrelatable cardboard cut-outs like the DC characters of the Silver Age? How times have changed.
-Old Villains, New Looks: Does this ever stick? The only villain I seem to recall that has managed to maintain any kind of "changing his look" from age to age is Lex Luthor (which I think says something about the robustness of Lex, but that's another story).

-The Gauntlet: And here we are, at last, the "big story" that is going to see Spider-Man face off against a mysterious mastermind who is amping up all his old badguys.

Oh, wait, that's "HUSH", the Jeph Loeb Batman story. Well, I can understand you wanting to go after something that was that commercially successful. Of course, the fact that the fanbase has become so jaded that you have to run a non-stop "Greatest Hits" album in order to keep them anywhere near the level you had before the retcon...well, that's not great news, is it?

Conclusions: Sorry, but yeah, Brand New Day? It's 1982, but with more unclear art, little narrative direction, and an inability to hook a reader on an endless loop. That's not good. And the fact that Marvel EIC Joe Quesada can't get that someone is going to come in and re-retcon it, or retcon it a different way, is both sad and funny.

Your thoughts?

Thirty for 30, part 4

Happy Valentine's Day

A Tribute to Epic Ownage

A Tribute to Romance (Sorta)

True Fact: In my original draft of this post, nearly all the posters involved Storm. But that's primarily because of Marvel Adventures: Avengers, in which she really does seem to have all the boys on a tight leash (Hawkeye, Thor, Black Panther....)

Pick the Best Caption

Pick the Best Poster

Busy week in the Lab, so posting is going to be a tad light, but I will try and give you guys stuff you want to see.