Thread Drift: Bloodlust of JM Dematteis

[Mister Mets]

One observation after reading "Web of Death." Dematteis is the angel of death with great Spider-Man characters. He killed Kraven, Harry Osborn and Aunt May, and was one of the writers in the story in which Doctor Octopus died. I like Stunner and Vermin, but I don't think the trade-off's been worth it.

[ZT4]

One observation. Dematteis is the angel of death with great Spider-Man characters. He killed Kraven, Harry Osborn and Aunt May, and was one of the writers in the story in which Doctor Octopus died. I like Stunner and Vermin, but I don't think the trade-off's been worth it.

Stunner and Vermin were good concepts, but I would agree that Vermin's story could of been told in about three to four years. "Death of Vermin" is one of my favourate "Spetacular" storylines mainly because it took advantage of Vermin having a limited story and closed it out

Stunner may have had a chance as a partner for Ben Reily if Tom had his way, but Marvel again buried a new character rather than try all directions with it.

[Jim Thompson]

One observation. Dematteis is the angel of death with great Spider-Man characters. He killed Kraven, Harry Osborn and Aunt May, and was one of the writers in the story in which Doctor Octopus died. I like Stunner and Vermin, but I don't think the trade-off's been worth it.I guess my only observation would be that while I think that's certainly true, Dematteis also has consistently demonstrated a pretty solid grasp of Peter Parker's character -- much better than a lot of the writers who have worked on the various Spider-Man books.

[Mister Mets]

I guess my only observation would be that while I think that's certainly true, Dematteis also has consistently demonstrated a pretty solid grasp of Peter Parker's character -- much better than a lot of the writers who have worked on the various Spider-Man books.Dematteis may just be the third best Spider-Man writer (after Lee and Stern.) But he still killed off three of the best Spider-Man characters ever (and participated in the story which killed off another.)

[Jim Thompson]

Dematteis may just be the third best Spider-Man writer (after Lee and Stern.) But he still killed off three of the best Spider-Man characters ever (and participated in the story which killed off another.)I guess none of those deaths affected me as much as some others. Each death he wrote resulted in some the best Spider-Man stories to come out in the history of the character -- and they all made sense inside the structure of the Spider-Verse. They didn't feel forced, or like they were done just for the sake of killing off a character. And, perhaps more importantly, they all moved the character forward and added to his mythos, something which has been sadly lacking over the past 10 years or so now.

[ZT4]

Dematteis may just be the third best Spider-Man writer (after Lee and Stern.) But he still killed off three of the best Spider-Man characters ever (and participated in the story which killed off another.)

Which really elevates him next to DeFalco as one of the most daring and bold writers in the franchise, as most of those characters really havent had a good or beleivable story since their "ressurections", I dont see what the big deal is. The only regret I have about Doc Ock's death is that it came in a story that opened up his old feelings towards May Parker (recognising her nephew) and gave him a new psychological edge with Spidey that could of been dealt with over the course of The Clone Saga.

For example...rather than Seward Trainer doing the tests (he would still be held hostage by his daughter), Doc Ock offers to volunteer to do it since he's the only other option available with Peter's blood tissue. This allowes Trainer, when rescued, to conduct real tests and disclose Peter is the real deal and Ben is the clone. Trainer shouldnt have been retconned as an Osborn flunkie.

[Mister Mets]

Which really elevates him next to DeFalco as one of the most daring and bold writers in the franchise, as most of those characters really havent had a good or beleivable story since their "ressurections", I dont see what the big deal is. The only regret I have about Doc Ock's death is that it came in a story that opened up his old feelings towards May Parker (recognising her nephew) and gave him a new psychological edge with Spidey that could of been dealt with over the course of The Clone Saga.

For example...rather than Seward Trainer doing the tests (he would still be held hostage by his daughter), Doc Ock offers to volunteer to do it since he's the only other option available with Peter's blood tissue. This allowes Trainer, when rescued, to conduct real tests and disclose Peter is the real deal and Ben is the clone. Trainer shouldnt have been retconned as an Osborn flunkie.Dematteis was bold, but his problem is that he closed doors in an organic fashion, rather than allowing for new storylines. It's better for the Spider-Man books when a writer does the opposite.

As for the great characters he killed, Kraven hasn't been resurrected, so I'll look at Doctor Octopus and Aunt May.

Good Aunt May stories post-resurrection:
Peter Parker Spider-Man #20-21: Aunt May helps Peter recover after the loss of Mary Jane.
Peter Parker Spider-Man #28: A painful family secret helps Peter deal with a moral dilemma as Spider-Man.
Amazing Spider-Man Volume 2 #31-35, 37-45: Aunt May convinces Peter to become a high school teacher, learns his secret and reacts appropriately.
Peter Parker Spider-Man #37: Just a fun story with Aunt May playing senile to hang out with her nephew during a blizzard.
Peter Parker Spider-Man #33/ Spectacular Spider-Man #27: For Aunt May's role with the Uncle Ben flashbacks.
Amazing Spider-Man #519: For Aunt May's reaction to her house burning down.
Marvel Knights Spider-Man #1-12: Aunt May's reactions to messier parts of Spider-Man's life (Norman bites), and her encouragement when Peter's ready to give up his hobby.

Good Doctor Octopus stories post-resurrection...
Spider-Man Unlimited #18: Solid origin story, as Peter and Mary Jane discuss the significance of Otto's return.
Peter Parker Spider-Man #39-41: In which Doctor Octopus demolishes a promising new villain.
Amazing Spider-Man Volume 2 #43-45: In which Aunt May realizes that her friend's an evil man. And Otto beats the crap out of an imposter.
Sensational Spider-Man #28: Probably Sacosa's most beloved issue. It wouldn't have worked as well with any other villain.

While I did enjoy Harry's role in Slott's latest story and his three page story in the first BND issue, it's too early to say that his resurrection has contributed to good stories. But so far, 2 out of 3 ain't bad.

[Jim Thompson]

Dematteis was bold, but his problem is that he closed doors in an organic fashion, rather than allowing for new storylines. It's better for the Spider-Man books when a writer does the opposite.

As for the great characters he killed, Kraven hasn't been resurrected, so I'll look at Doctor Octopus and Aunt May.

Good Aunt May stories post-resurrection:
Peter Parker Spider-Man #20-21: Aunt May helps Peter recover after the loss of Mary Jane.
Peter Parker Spider-Man #28: A painful family secret helps Peter deal with a moral dilemma as Spider-Man.
Amazing Spider-Man Volume 2 #31-35, 37-45: Aunt May convinces Peter to become a high school teacher, learns his secret and reacts appropriately.
Peter Parker Spider-Man #37: Just a fun story with Aunt May playing senile to hang out with her nephew during a blizzard.
Peter Parker Spider-Man #33/ Spectacular Spider-Man #27: For Aunt May's role with the Uncle Ben flashbacks.
Amazing Spider-Man #519: For Aunt May's reaction to her house burning down.
Marvel Knights Spider-Man #1-12: Aunt May's reactions to messier parts of Spider-Man's life (Norman bites), and her encouragement when Peter's ready to give up his hobby.

Good Doctor Octopus stories post-resurrection...
Spider-Man Unlimited #18: Solid origin story, as Peter and Mary Jane discuss the significance of Otto's return.
Peter Parker Spider-Man #39-41: In which Doctor Octopus demolishes a promising new villain.
Amazing Spider-Man Volume 2 #43-45: In which Aunt May realizes that her friend's an evil man. And Otto beats the crap out of an imposter.
Sensational Spider-Man #28: Probably Sacosa's most beloved issue. It wouldn't have worked as well with any other villain.

While I did enjoy Harry's role in Slott's latest story and his three page story in the first BND issue, it's too early to say that his resurrection has contributed to good stories. But so far, 2 out of 3 ain't bad.More like one out of four for me, the one being Doc Ock (the one he had a hand in, but wasn't solely responsible for). The May stories you reference didn't blow me away to the point where I thought "Boy, am I glad they brought her back!" And her death didn't necessarily completely close the door on her use as a character (how many Spider-Man stories have been done where Peter is talking with Ben Parker after he's died? Same thing goes for flashback stories; character doesn't have to be alive to do a flashback story.).

[Mister Mets]

More like one out of four for me, the one being Doc Ock (the one he had a hand in, but wasn't solely responsible for). The May stories you reference didn't blow me away to the point where I thought "Boy, am I glad they brought her back!" And her death didn't necessarily completely close the door on her use as a character (how many Spider-Man stories have been done where Peter is talking with Ben Parker after he's died? Same thing goes for flashback stories; character doesn't have to be alive to do a flashback story.).
The character does have to be alive for stories in which the past is relevant. Aunt May is the one link to pre-Amazing Fantasy #15 Peter Parker (and his family), and she's essential for the stories in which that's important.

And I forgot to mention Stern's "The Revenge of the Green Goblin" crossover as an example of a good Aunt May story. Granted, I thought the stories I mentioned were worth bringing her back, and proof she shouldn't have been killed off in the first place.

[Jim Thompson]

The character does have to be alive for stories in which the past is relevant. Aunt May is the one link to pre-Amazing Fantasy #15 Peter Parker (and his family), and she's essential for the stories in which that's important.Why? Why couldn't she be used in exactly the same way Ben is used? What's the difference?

[ZT4]

The character does have to be alive for stories in which the past is relevant..

No, she doesnt "have" to be alive, and the last time they did a story where that was "releavant", they retconned Ben's death slightly to state he died OUTSIDE the house. What does that say about the "relevant past"? Nothing. The past is FLEXABLE, and I have no interest in reading a title that's "flexable" to keep an irrelevant and dated character alive long past her sell-by-date. Aunt May is for NOSTALGISTS, not fans of progression and fresh directions for younger, more energetic and interesting characters.

I'd love to put a "May Parker" ban tto follow Quesada's smoking ban just so the writers can think of new and fresh stories.

[matthewaos]

I think the venom story was ok, but overall nothing really special. Back from the edge was kind of boring, but Daredevil played a great role.

[Cody H]

One observation. Dematteis is the angel of death with great Spider-Man characters. He killed Kraven, Harry Osborn and Aunt May, and was one of the writers in the story in which Doctor Octopus died. I like Stunner and Vermin, but I don't think the trade-off's been worth it.Yeah, pretty much. On one hand, he is able to bring out the best in characters but on the other, it's usually just before he kills them.

[brundlefly]

I don't think the writers give a damn that Doc Ock died during the Clone Saga (before he was brought back by the same writer who killed him.) Since then, he's been in some good stuff by Millar

When was this "good stuff" by Millar? Ock only had a brief cameo as a drugged, mute, brainwashed would-be assassin in Millar's MK Spidey run. Did he write another Spidey/Doc Ock story later that was actually good?

[Mister Mets]

When was this "good stuff" by Millar? Ock only had a brief cameo as a drugged, mute, brainwashed would-be assassin in Millar's MK Spidey run. Did he write another Spidey/Doc Ock story later that was actually good?Millar wrote a story that was damn good.

Doctor Octopus appeared in it.

I do not believe Ock's death/ resurrection had any impact on his portrayal in the story.

[ZT4]

Millar wrote a story that was damn good.

Doctor Octopus appeared in it.

I do not believe Ock's death/ resurrection had any impact on his portrayal in the story.

Nobody knows how being ressurected by magic affects you...it seemingly robs you of intelligent writing, but otherwise...

[Jim Thompson]

Millar wrote a story that was damn good.

Doctor Octopus appeared in it.

I do not believe Ock's death/ resurrection had any impact on his portrayal in the story.I'll respectfully disagree here. Millar's story did nothing for me -- but then I am not a Millar fan.

[Jim Thompson]

Yeah, pretty much. On one hand, he is able to bring out the best in characters but on the other, it's usually just before he kills them.He's certainly best remembered for killing characters -- but in fact, he really didn't kill off that many. And as I said before, I think when he did kill a character, it was not done primarily for shock value; it added to the overall Spider-Man mythos.

[Cody H]

He's certainly best remembered for killing characters -- but in fact, he really didn't kill off that many. And as I said before, I think when he did kill a character, it was not done primarily for shock value; it added to the overall Spider-Man mythos. In comparison to most Spidey writers, I'd say he's had his fair share of "kills." But don't get me wrong, this is not a criticism or anything. In fact, DeMatteis is my favorite Spider-Man writer. You're right, I don't think his deaths were "shock value" deaths at all; they made sense to the story, and as I said, were in many cases shinning moments for the character in question.

[Mister Mets]

Nobody knows how being ressurected by magic affects you...it seemingly robs you of intelligent writing, but otherwise...I've yet to be convinced that Doc Ock's been affected by the resurrection.

The Mackie/ Byrne stories weren't that good, but that's hardly unique. Jenkins, JMS and Sacosa all wrote the character well.

Doc Ock fans hardly have reason to be disappointed with the last few years of the Spider-Man books.

I'll respectfully disagree here. Millar's story did nothing for me -- but then I am not a Millar fan. Fair enough.

[Mister Mets]

Why? Why couldn't she be used in exactly the same way Ben is used? What's the difference?Because when May's gone, there's no one in the supporting cast
1) who knew Peter Parker before he became Spider-Man.
or
2) who knew his parents.

That's one key reason Aunt May should stick around.

When Uncle Ben died, Aunt May still knew a lot of the stories/ lessons that he knew.

No, she doesnt "have" to be alive, and the last time they did a story where that was "releavant", they retconned Ben's death slightly to state he died OUTSIDE the house. What does that say about the "relevant past"? Nothing. The past is FLEXABLE, and I have no interest in reading a title that's "flexable" to keep an irrelevant and dated character alive long past her sell-by-date. Aunt May is for NOSTALGISTS, not fans of progression and fresh directions for younger, more energetic and interesting characters.

I'd love to put a "May Parker" ban tto follow Quesada's smoking ban just so the writers can think of new and fresh stories.

First, in a supporting cast composed mostly of younger, more energetic characters, it helps to have an older character as a contrast. Even if she only appears in the book occasionally.

Second, the majority of Americans in their twenties or even late thirties have a living parental figure. For Peter Parker to be an exception here is not progress. You may get a good story with Aunt May dying (or the benefits of making Amazing Spider-Man #400 be about the "real" Aunt May.) But you lose far more than you gain.

I get that you're upset that JMS contradicted developments in Amazing Spider-Man #200. However, that's not an indication that writers who want to reference the past are going to be as careless.

[Mister Mets]

He's certainly best remembered for killing characters -- but in fact, he really didn't kill off that many. And as I said before, I think when he did kill a character, it was not done primarily for shock value; it added to the overall Spider-Man mythos. He killed four of the fifteen or so best Spider-Man characters (Lee/ Ditko creations all). That's a pretty high percentage for one writer.

[Jim Thompson]

Because when May's gone, there's no one in the supporting cast
1) who knew Peter Parker before he became Spider-Man.
or
2) who knew his parents.

That's one key reason Aunt May should stick around.

When Uncle Ben died, Aunt May still knew a lot of the stories/ lessons that he knew.

First, in a supporting cast composed mostly of younger, more energetic characters, it helps to have an older character as a contrast. Even if she only appears in the book occasionally.

Second, the majority of Americans in their twenties or even late thirties have a living parental figure. For Peter Parker to be an exception here is not progress. You may get a good story with Aunt May dying (or the benefits of making Amazing Spider-Man #400 be about the "real" Aunt May.) But you lose far more than you gain.

I get that you're upset that JMS contradicted developments in Amazing Spider-Man #200. However, that's not an indication that writers who want to reference the past are going to be as careless.Okay -- I just disagree. As I usually do, I don't really find your idea of good story structure and design to be all that entertaining. :biggrin:

[Mister Mets]

Okay -- I just disagree. As I usually do, I don't really find your idea of good story structure and design to be all that entertaining. :biggrin: Keep in mind that this is something that I believe is necessary when dealing with a serial that's like going to continue for another thirty years.

The rules are different if the Spider-Man books were guaranteed to come to an end some time in the next decade.

[Jim Thompson]

He killed four of the fifteen or so best Spider-Man characters (Lee/ Ditko creations all). That's a pretty high percentage for one writer.As your thread title implies! Yikes! :eek:

[ReggieWhiteJr]

Another one of my favorite JM DeMatties stories is Sensational Spider-Man Annual '96, Kraven's FIRST Hunt. Its a retelling of Amazing Spider-Man #15, which excellent character interpretations of Kraven and Chameleon.

[JamesOliva]

He killed four of the fifteen or so best Spider-Man characters (Lee/ Ditko creations all). That's a pretty high percentage for one writer.

I'd still argue that Kraven wasn't that great of a character before Dematteis. But how many of those deaths were Dematteis's idea and how many were editorially suggested? Serious question, I have no idea, but I believe it was DeFalco's idea to kill Doc Ock.

[StoneGold]

I don't know if Doc even really counts. I'm just saying, his death seemed the least permanent when it happened. Or maybe it was just the crappiest one with the least real impact, which usually signals an eventual resurrection.

Although I wasn't a big fan of the May or Harry deaths. May, in part because I hate the "I knew you were ______ all along!" story. It's cheap and cloying. Didn't work for MJ, didn't work for May. The other problem being it was like killing off Alfred. Which DC did way back when, and then retconned out for the TV show. Sound familiar?

Harry, actually, it's not so much that I hated the Harry death. They had probably done as much with him as they could. Make him crazy, make him not crazy. Repeat. It's more the movie that made Harry's death seem premature in hindsight. Made you go, huh, we could go some fun places with Harry alive again.


I doubt that's ever going to happen with Kraven.

[Jim Thompson]

Always felt Dematteis had a talent for taking a character who had been seen as being played out and gave them a great send off. The trouble is he usually did such a good job with that, so reminded the readers of the core strengths of those characters, that suddenly people realized losing those characters was not really something they wanted to happen in the first place.

[brundlefly]

He killed Kraven, Harry Osborn and Aunt May

And also wrote arguably the best stories featuring those three characters leading to their deaths, so I would say yes, the trade-off was well worth it. Neither Harry nor May have done anything since their resurrections, in terms of story quality, rivaling DeMatteis' work with them to justify their being brought back to life, imo. If they had, I could see your point in that it could be viewed as a mistake to deprive the Spidey series of them. And since 99% of comics deaths are temporary anyway, it's more like DeMatteis was just taking them out of place for the time being until a future writer (or editor) decided to resurrect them.

[Jim Thompson]

And also wrote arguably the best stories featuring those three characters leading to their deaths, so I would say yes, the trade-off was well worth it. Neither Harry nor May have done anything since their resurrections, in terms of story quality, rivaling DeMatteis' work with them to justify their being brought back to life, imo. If they had, I could see your point in that it could be viewed as a mistake to deprive the Spidey series of them. And since 99% of comics deaths are temporary anyway, it's more like DeMatteis was just taking them out of place for the time being until a future writer (or editor) decided to resurrect them.Well, in fairness, I do think JMS did some interesting things with May -- but then marvel up and did away with all that progress, regressing her to her former, rather uninteresting self.

[Mister Mets]

Another one of my favorite JM DeMatties stories is Sensational Spider-Man Annual '96, Kraven's FIRST Hunt. Its a retelling of Amazing Spider-Man #15, which excellent character interpretations of Kraven and Chameleon.Agree. Excellent and underrated story.

Well, in fairness, I do think JMS did some interesting things with May -- but then marvel up and did away with all that progress, regressing her to her former, rather uninteresting self.There's always the potential for Aunt May to relearn Spider-Man's identity, once Marvel gets tired of the idea that no one knows who Spider-Man is (an element of the status quo that we haven't seen in decades).

[Jim Thompson]

There's always the potential for Aunt May to relearn Spider-Man's identity, once Marvel gets tired of the idea that no one knows who Spider-Man is (an element of the status quo that we haven't seen in decades).Sure -- but that can now be said of so many things concerning Spider-Man: Look at all the stories we now get to tell again. Not so much new as merely updated.

As someone else noted in another thread (in reference to something else) in a lot of ways, ASM simply feels stale right now.

[brundlefly]

Sure -- but that can now be said of so many things concerning Spider-Man: Look at all the stories we now get to tell again. Not so much new as merely updated.

As someone else noted in another thread (in reference to something else) in a lot of ways, ASM simply feels stale right now.

Agreed. I don't care for the trend of retconning/undoing events just so that they can be "redone" by another writer, except not as well as they were done the first time around. So now we can get the third or fourth iteration of "Aunt May discovers Pete's secret ID?" And how long until that gets "undone" so it can be tried again by someone else? :rolleyes: Whatever. Try creating new characters or telling a more creative or original story instead of this mind-numbing cycle of event/retcon/repeat.

[brundlefly]

Millar wrote a story that was damn good.

Doctor Octopus appeared in it.

I do not believe Ock's death/ resurrection had any impact on his portrayal in the story.

Oh, for...:rolleyes: Your initial post's insinuation was that it was "a good post-Clone Saga Spidey/Doc Ock story by Millar," not "a good Spidey story by Millar that Ock had a brief and unflattering cameo in" which is the more accurate description. Regardless of one's opinion of that overall story, Ock's role was certainly not "good stuff."

[ZT4]

Keep in mind that this is something that I believe is necessary when dealing with a serial that's like going to continue for another thirty years

So you're using "Simpsons" logic?

This "serial" has met ten years of dead-end ideas and poor characterisation. There are so many ways you can call something "dead on it's feet". The Simpsons is a corpse, it died more than ten years ago quality-wise, but it's still airing.

Spider-Man is an infinite franchise, not an infinite story. There is no new ideas where we stand presently, we have to structually move heroes on or the comic market WILL eventually suffer for it.

There's always the potential for Aunt May to relearn Spider-Man's identity, once Marvel gets tired of the idea that no one knows who Spider-Man is (an element of the status quo that we haven't seen in decades).

...The female Kraven learns who he is in the next big arc, and MJ may know who Spidey is.

There already tired of it.

[Jim Thompson]

This "serial" has met ten years of dead-end ideas and poor characterisation. There are so many ways you can call something "dead on it's feet". The Simpsons is a corpse, it died more than ten years ago quality-wise, but it's still airing.

Spider-Man is an infinite franchise, not an infinite story. There is no new ideas where we stand presently, we have to structually move heroes on or the comic market WILL eventually suffer for it.The trouble I have with Mets' logic is that basically he's saying anytime the character adds a new twist, it has to be undone for the "good" of the franchise, because it won't fit into a serial format.

I think that's ridiculous, and in my opinion such thinking almost guarantees the eventual collapse of the franchise.

[Jim Thompson]

Oh, for...:rolleyes: Your initial post's insinuation was that it was "a good post-Clone Saga Spidey/Doc Ock story by Millar," not "a good Spidey story by Millar that Ock had a brief and unflattering cameo in" which is the more accurate description. Regardless of one's opinion of that overall story, Ock's role was certainly not "good stuff."Yeah, part of the reason I didn't enjoy Millar's story was because of his horrible treatment of Doc Ock.

[ZT4]

The trouble I have with Mets' logic is that basically he's saying anytime the character adds a new twist, it has to be undone for the "good" of the franchise, because it won't fit into a serial format.

I think that's ridiculous, and in my opinion such thinking almost guarantees the eventual collapse of the franchise.

It's exactly my opinion of things and why this company needs to rethink it's priorities.

Pandering to nostalgists and those that worship the almighty "reset button" is the most inane thing I have ever heard of as a writer and as a comic fan, and it speaks volumes of how dated both Marvel AND those fans truly are. It's like arguing with your grandparents, or in Marvel's case, letting your grandparents tell you war stories

[Mister Mets]

The trouble I have with Mets' logic is that basically he's saying anytime the character adds a new twist, it has to be undone for the "good" of the franchise, because it won't fit into a serial format.

I think that's ridiculous, and in my opinion such thinking almost guarantees the eventual collapse of the franchise.I don't have problem with twists or new additions, just those that close opportunities for future stories.

For example, I'd be opposed to the Spider-Man books jumping forward ten years to Peter Parker being a happily married father in his late thirties.

I wouldn't be opposed to the introduction of a new character, as that shouldn't limit the writers.


It's exactly my opinion of things and why this company needs to rethink it's priorities.

Pandering to nostalgists and those that worship the almighty "reset button" is the most inane thing I have ever heard of as a writer and as a comic fan, and it speaks volumes of how dated both Marvel AND those fans truly are. It's like arguing with your grandparents, or in Marvel's case, letting your grandparents tell you war stories :confused:

I don't get that metaphor.

[Mister Mets]

So you're using "Simpsons" logic?

This "serial" has met ten years of dead-end ideas and poor characterisation. There are so many ways you can call something "dead on it's feet". The Simpsons is a corpse, it died more than ten years ago quality-wise, but it's still airing.

Spider-Man is an infinite franchise, not an infinite story. There is no new ideas where we stand presently, we have to structually move heroes on or the comic market WILL eventually suffer for it. I'm not really using Simpsons logic, as the two franchises have one key difference. Things sometimes change for Spider-Man from issue to issue. They don't really change for the Simpsons.

...The female Kraven learns who he is in the next big arc, and MJ may know who Spidey is.

There already tired of it.I'll wait until Guggenheim's story comes out to see how it changes the status quo. As for MJ, that's speculation at this point.

[Jim Thompson]

I don't have problem with twists or new additions, just those that close opportunities for future stories.Forgive me, but it strikes me nearly all your proposed options do little more than close off opportunities for future stories. Your Spider-Man will be perpetually trapped as a 20 something, single man who constantly "relearns" the same lessons.

[ZT4]

Precisly.

Indulging and rewarding stupidity isnt fair to people who want to tell mainstream stories of a Peter who is a parent in the future.

Jim, Mets will never change, no offense to him, but his breed of fan is the worst in the industry.

[matthewaos]

Regarding DeMatteis, who is btw my favorite writer.

I think as, many stated that his stories leading to a death were so great, that the loss of a character was not annoying, and all his deaths seem permanent, he does not leave the space for a comeback. That is why those stories are so great, cause it leaves you understand you'll never see, example, Aunt May. As for Kraven, specifically, he wrote a fantastic story, one of the best Spider-Man stories ever, with a c-list (at best) bad guy, making him worth his silly appearances. And the most exiting thing? No one brought him back, because they don't want to ruin the story. He gave him credibility with his death. It's like Osborn's death, that no one wanted to bring him back, only Kraven is more in the b-list, and he far from Spidey's arch nemesis.
I never liked Doc Ock's death, and thankfully the issue where he dies is not by JDM.
And I'm not going to speak about Harry, cause it's the same with Kraven, only he was even more of a threat, and he also kind of gives more credit to Osborn because if not for him and his legacy, things would not be like that).

Other that his deaths, the man has writen some really great Spider-Man stories. His two runs in spec are must reads, imo. His ASM run not so much, but he was sure writing the best clone saga parts.

[brundlefly]

Yeah, part of the reason I didn't enjoy Millar's story was because of his horrible treatment of Doc Ock.

Yeah, Ock's inclusion seemed completely cameo-ish and unnecessary, much like that of the Chameleon, the Lizard, and the rest of the "Sinister Twelve." To once again compare that MK story to DC's Hush and its obsessive checklist-parade of all of Batman's rogues, it seems like Millar felt it necessary to include Ock (so that all Spidey's major rogues made appearances, regardless of whether or not they were used well) but didn't want him to overshadow Norman as the main bad guy, so he hobbled him with the drugs & brainwashing angle. Not Ock's finest hour by a long shot and, again, it was most certainly not "good stuff."

[Jim Thompson]

Yeah, Ock's inclusion seemed completely cameo-ish and unnecessary, much like that of the Chameleon, the Lizard, and the rest of the "Sinister Twelve." To once again compare that MK story to DC's Hush and its obsessive checklist-parade of all of Batman's rogues, it seems like Millar felt it necessary to include Ock (so that all Spidey's major rogues made appearances, regardless of whether or not they were used well) but didn't want him to overshadow Norman as the main bad guy, so he hobbled him with the drugs & brainwashing angle. Not Ock's finest hour by a long shot and, again, it was most certainly not "good stuff."This is way off topic (sorry Mets) but that was one of my over-arching dislikes with Millar's run as a whole. His run felt very forced to me.

[brundlefly]

This is way off topic (sorry Mets) but that was one of my over-arching dislikes with Millar's run as a whole. His run felt very forced to me.

True. Much like DC's Hush (MK Spidey's parallel as a very sloppy and forced story that some fans inexplicably lionize as a "classic") I don't get the appeal beyond the Dodson art and the rogues gallery parade. The actual story was rife with plot holes and its big "mystery villain" reveal was groan-inducingly anticlimactic. Putting the Venom symbiote on Gargan was the story's only lasting impact or event of note, and I'll admit that was an interesting move (although I miss Gargan-as-Scorpion).

Hm? Off-topic? Oh, yeah, right; the thread's about the latest attempt at creating a 'new Kraven.' I'll probably give Guggenheim's story a go, since it has Jimenez on art and DD guest-starring to boost it. I don't want to hold the previous two failures at a Kraven-legacy villain against it, plus Spidey could use a new quality female antagonist. Although if she works out as a good character, I do hope Guggenheim doesn't have her eat her rifle at the end of the story in an homage. :biggrin:

[Mister Mets]

Oh, for...:rolleyes: Your initial post's insinuation was that it was "a good post-Clone Saga Spidey/Doc Ock story by Millar," not "a good Spidey story by Millar that Ock had a brief and unflattering cameo in" which is the more accurate description. Regardless of one's opinion of that overall story, Ock's role was certainly not "good stuff."I thought it was an interesting take on the character that we really haven't seen before. Why can't an A-list villain be entirely manipulated for an entire storyline?

But if you choose not to include that as a good Dr Octopus story, you still have ASM Vol 2 #43-45, Peter Parker Spider-Man #39-41 and Sensational Spider-Man #28 (discounting several excellent flashback stories.)

[Red Lotus]

I'm sorry but changing an origin to powers given by a totem God and wannabe wolvirine stingers is not a good change.

right around sins past is when JMS started jumping the shark.

Aunt May knowing that Peter is Spider-man was one of the biggest and best changes to that character and to the Spider-man books.

[DeadXMan]

Aunt May knowing that Peter is Spider-man was one of the biggest and best changes to that character and to the Spider-man books.

yeah too bad they did it better in ASM #400 only to retcon it away horribly

[Mister Mets]

yeah too bad they did it better in ASM #400 only to retcon it away horribly
That's debatable.

JMS showed that there were stories you could do after Aunt May learned Peter's identity (rather than killing a fixture of the franchise.) Plus, JMS's Morlun story which led to Amazing Spider-Man Volume 2 #38 was much better than the first six months of the Clone Saga (which I've read recently (http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?t=223964).)

Both were probably 10/10 issues, but Dematteis isn't unambiguously better.

[DeadXMan]

I still liked she revealing she always knew he was spider-man, then passing away seem more iconic then the elevator scene/and how she found out. and the only time I recall using her knowledge Pete as Spidey was calming the shooters were her defibrillators

[cpahl2000]

I still liked she revealing she always knew he was spider-man, then passing away seem more iconic then the elevator scene/and how she found out. and the only time I recall using her knowledge Pete as Spidey was calming the shooters were her defibrillators


That´s true. That was a good moment.

[brundlefly]

I thought it was an interesting take on the character that we really haven't seen before. Why can't an A-list villain be entirely manipulated for an entire storyline?

But if you choose not to include that as a good Dr Octopus story, you still have ASM Vol 2 #43-45, Peter Parker Spider-Man #39-41 and Sensational Spider-Man #28 (discounting several excellent flashback stories.)

Odd that you'd mention PP:SM #39-41 while making that claim, where we did see this supposedly "never-before-seen interesting take on Doc Ock as a manipulated pawn" done by Paul Jenkins a full two years before Millar did it. So once more: no, Ock's brief and unflattering role in MK Spidey was neither good nor in any way original.

[Mister Mets]

Odd that you'd mention PP:SM #39-41 while making that claim, where we did see this supposedly "never-before-seen interesting take on Doc Ock as a manipulated pawn" done by Paul Jenkins a full two years before Millar did it. So once more: no, Ock's brief and unflattering role in MK Spidey was neither good nor in any way original.This argument started with someone making the point that Dr Octopus hasn't been written well since his resurrection.

I still think he had an interesting role in Millar's MK Spider-Man. You disagree.

Do you think he has been written poorly (or not written well) in every story in which he's appeared since Amazing Spider-Man #428?

[Mister Mets]

I still liked she revealing she always knew he was spider-man, then passing away seem more iconic then the elevator scene/and how she found out. and the only time I recall using her knowledge Pete as Spidey was calming the shooters were her defibrillatorsIt's iconic, but it doesn't work as well in a never-ending serial.

The only reason May died was that Marvel was planning on ending Peter Parker's story anyway.

[AbdulAziz]

Vermin didn't die.
At least the man within is still alive.

Kravens last hunt is J.M.Dematties best story to get rid of a character in the world of Spider-Man.

[ZT4]

The only reason May died was that Marvel was planning on ending Peter Parker's story anyway.

Newsflash: It DID end. It ended ten years ago.

Keep reading for your nostalgia fix, Spider-Man is dead in every other capacity.

[brundlefly]

This argument started with someone making the point that Dr Octopus hasn't been written well since his resurrection.

I still think he had an interesting role in Millar's MK Spider-Man. You disagree.

Do you think he has been written poorly (or not written well) in every story in which he's appeared since Amazing Spider-Man #428?

No, just the inclusion (and repeated defenses) of his superfluous cameo in Millar's MK Spidey as being somehow either good or interesting. I quite dug the Jenkins Fusion story he was in, the JMS story with him versus Carlyle, and both the Year One and Negative Exposure minis (where he compared himself to Da Vinci's "Vitruvian Man" piece, which I thought was very cool). He's been handled very well by several writers since his magic resurrection in ASM #428, but Millar just wasn't one of them.

[StoneGold]

Newsflash: It DID end. It ended ten years ago.

Keep reading for your nostalgia fix, Spider-Man is dead in every other capacity.

In that case, why do you care at all about the status of the marriage, if the book has been dead to you for a decade now, anyway?


For that matter, why would you harp on something you haven't cared about in 10 years?

[Muscles Coleman]

Favorite DeMatteis story: Light the Night in PP:SM (vol. 1) #38-40. Obscure, yet awesome in its portrayal of Electro. And... he didn't die!

[Mister Mets]

Newsflash: It DID end. It ended ten years ago.

Keep reading for your nostalgia fix, Spider-Man is dead in every other capacity.

Nope. The story's been continuing. There was a stretch from 1993 to 2000 when it wasn't that good, but it's quite enjoyable at the moment.

[Jim Thompson]

Nope. The story's been continuing. There was a stretch from 1993 to 2000 when it wasn't that good, but it's quite enjoyable at the moment.I find Captain America, Thor, Batman R.I.P. and Final Crisis to be quite enjoyable right now. ASM is just sort of there (again, with the exception of this last Slott arc, which was pretty enjoyable).

[Cody H]

Favorite DeMatteis story: Light the Night in PP:SM (vol. 1) #38-40. Obscure, yet awesome in its portrayal of Electro. And... he didn't die!Yes! I'm glad someone brought this one up, and kind of
annoyed that I didn't think to do it myself. I hated the art but the story was excellent.

[Muscles Coleman]

Yes! I'm glad someone brought this one up, and kind of
annoyed that I didn't think to do it myself. I hated the art but the story was excellent.
I've expressed my love of this story on many different forums and you are the first to have come out and agreed with me. I think we could be good buddies on here. Yet... you didn't like the art? I actually am fond of Klaus Janson's work... I thought it was great, especially for the time-period when Marvel was flooding the market with any hack artist they could get.

[Chris Nowlin]

Dematteis may just be the third best Spider-Man writer (after Lee and Stern.) But he still killed off three of the best Spider-Man characters ever (and participated in the story which killed off another.)

I think characters dying is a good thing. I know you like the "illusion of change", but I prefer closure. The Harry saga needed closure.

Kraven's death was the best Kraven story ever.

Aunt May had been dying for 35 years.


Killing Doc Ock was him pushing his luck. But not many people seemed to upset when he came back. Even though it was a good comic, it wasn't the perfect and beautiful ending that the other arcs were.

I think killing characters is good, as long as it's done intelligently and respectfully. Which he does. He doesn't just kill people because he needs deaths for his storyarc (like say Bendis or some such). He brings their arc to a satisfying conclusion.

[ZT4]

Nope. The story's been continuing.

The only person you're fooling in that catergory is yourself. The story ended years ago, everything else is just reruns.

C'mon man, be reallistic, enough with the corporate "Yes-Man" mentality, it just looks tired and sad

There was a stretch from 1993 to 2000 when it wasn't that goodt.

No, there was a stretch from 1998 to 2001 when it was'nt that good. I know you have disdain for everything since 1993, but that was the most underrated period of Spider-Man's mythology and it told some good stuff. You'll never swallow that of course because you're opposed to change and virtually ANYTHING INTERESTING HAPPENING TO ANYONE.


I've expressed my love of this story on many different forums and you are the first to have come out and agreed with me. I think we could be good buddies on here. Yet... you didn't like the art? I actually am fond of Klaus Janson's work... I thought it was great, especially for the time-period when Marvel was flooding the market with any hack artist they could get.

It's got an aqquired taste, but I could stomach it. You're right on the story. DeFalco even used the scene where he hugs Spidey as motivation for his bad-ass Electro attempting to redeem his tarnished masculenity

[matthewaos]

That's debatable.

JMS showed that there were stories you could do after Aunt May learned Peter's identity (rather than killing a fixture of the franchise.) Plus, JMS's Morlun story which led to Amazing Spider-Man Volume 2 #38 was much better than the first six months of the Clone Saga (which I've read recently (http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?t=223964).)

Both were probably 10/10 issues, but Dematteis isn't unambiguously better.

Leaving aside that I disagree with eternal soap operas etc...

JMS' story was his and only his. DeMatteis was caught between a multi crossover every month, and still, it's the best story from that period, and a story that a lot of people remember still. Yes, JMS showed that interesting things can happen when May knows, but don't you think that JMS also knew that this will probably end? JQ said that he had OMD planned (or started the planning) the day he became EIC.

[Mister Mets]

Leaving aside that I disagree with eternal soap operas etc...

JMS' story was his and only his. DeMatteis was caught between a multi crossover every month, and still, it's the best story from that period, and a story that a lot of people remember still. Yes, JMS showed that interesting things can happen when May knows, but don't you think that JMS also knew that this will probably end? JQ said that he had OMD planned (or started the planning) the day he became EIC.Joe Quesada had been planning to undo the marriage since he became EIC. That's distinct from planning OMD during the same time. JMS was surely aware that any development in comics may reversed, but I think he was able to get more material out of Aunt May learning Spider-Man's identity than Dematteis was (and he enabled other writers to tell more good stories than Dematteis's decision to kill Aunt May.)

[Mister Mets]

The only person you're fooling in that catergory is yourself. The story ended years ago, everything else is just reruns.

C'mon man, be reallistic, enough with the corporate "Yes-Man" mentality, it just looks tired and sadPlease don't post your fringe opinion as a concrete fact (especially when it is a concrete fact that Spider-Man's adventures have continued after 1998), and then call me a "corporate Yes-Man" for not agreeing with you.

No, there was a stretch from 1998 to 2001 when it was'nt that good. I know you have disdain for everything since 1993, but that was the most underrated period of Spider-Man's mythology and it told some good stuff. You'll never swallow that of course because you're opposed to change and virtually ANYTHING INTERESTING HAPPENING TO ANYONE.
From 1998 to 2001, I had no objection to change in the Spider-Man books. I was much younger than. I don't have any problem with interesting stuff happening to the heroes. I just don't believe it should be allowed to limit future writers. There are two ways of looking at the Spider-Man books as a franchise.
One is that Slott & company inherited Spider-Man from JMS. Another is that Slott & company borrowed Spider-Man from Ed Brubaker & Gail Simone (two people who will surely write Spider-Man in the future.) I believe that the latter is the best way of looking at the situation.

I did start reading the books regularly from 1998 to 2001, and I'll admit I wasn't impressed with the period. But having just read the first six months of the Clone Saga (and the books leading into it) I can't say that it was an impressive period. Change happened, but it hasn't been well executed.

It's got an aqquired taste, but I could stomach it. You're right on the story. DeFalco even used the scene where he hugs Spidey as motivation for his bad-ass Electro attempting to redeem his tarnished masculenityI wonder if the hug inspired Millar's take on Elector's "new horizons."

[matthewaos]

Light the night is an excellent example of a great story, and it doesn't involve death, that has become DeMatteis' TM. :tongue: Though Electro is loosing his power in the end, if I remember right. DeFalco used those elements very well, if I may add, and taking Electro's mask was a brilliant move. God, his costume is so silly!!

As for May, I'm not sure we can agree something else, than to disagree. I think that DeMatteis wrote a better story than JMS, though JMS used it more. Have in mind that DeMatteis wanted cap (when he was writing the title) to stop being cap, then the gov will execute him, and a new would take his place, specifically he wanted that Indian guy who appeared in Thunderbolts (can't remember his dream). When the Brubaker story was published there was an interview saying that Shooter didn't want that story, and he rewrote it himself. And as JDM said "guess what some years and an other editor can do"

[Jim Thompson]

But having just read the first six months of the Clone Saga (and the books leading into it) I can't say that it was an impressive period. Change happened, but it hasn't been well executed.Please don't post your fringe opinion as a concrete fact. :biggrin:

[Mister Mets]

Please don't post your fringe opinion as a concrete fact. :biggrin:
Hey, I'm not claiming that Spider-Man comics weren't published during this time. :biggrin:

[Jim Thompson]

Hey, I'm not claiming that Spider-Man comics weren't published during this time. :biggrin:LOL! Touche'! :biggrin:

[matthewaos]

Let's be honest here, when the clone saga started, it went really good, sales regarding. And thinking what was happening before that (I am the spider, robot parents, and I want also to add facade) I don't ask why. But almost everyone of the writers that had something to do with it, are considered damned, and generally no one wants to read a story by them. Except DeMatteis, who also everyone admits that if the clone saga had one good thing, it was him.

And killing Aunt May was not DeMatteis idea, I remember DeFalco saying in an interview that they had three big "events" for Spider-Man, one being the clone saga, and the other two were MJ pregnant, and Aunt May dying. So they went for the CS... up until the point they decided "why not do all three?"

[Red Lotus]

yeah too bad they did it better in ASM #400 only to retcon it away horribly

Nothing really happen. It was more like Peter you're Spider-man I'm proud of you then she dies. Its touching but thats all it was.

That's debatable.

JMS showed that there were stories you could do after Aunt May learned Peter's identity (rather than killing a fixture of the franchise.) Plus, JMS's Morlun story which led to Amazing Spider-Man Volume 2 #38 was much better than the first six months of the Clone Saga (which I've read recently (http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?t=223964).)

Both were probably 10/10 issues, but Dematteis isn't unambiguously better.

Yeah this is one of the biggest let downs of BND that everything they did with May now feels like its been reset u can take May from when she first showed up and replace her with the one we have now and its not going to be that much of a difference.

[Cody H]

Nothing really happen. It was more like Peter you're Spider-man I'm proud of you then she dies. Its touching but thats all it was.Nothing else really could happen because she died. I think the point is that May's death in #400 was an excellent ending for the character.

[Jim Thompson]

Nothing really happen. It was more like Peter you're Spider-man I'm proud of you then she dies. Its touching but thats all it was.And that was all it needed to be. May got some interesting treatment courtesy of JMS, but it wasn't so good it justified bringing her back from the dead. And what's happening with her now makes me wish JMS had never brought her back at all.

[Mister Mets]

Nothing else really could happen because she died. I think the point is that May's death in #400 was an excellent ending for the character.Except writers could have done more with the aftermath of Aunt May's death.

I watched the entire Aaron Sorkin run of West Wing a while back, and he got tremendous material with the death of a character in the last two episodes of Season 2. That death influenced a major decision in the Season 2 finale, and resonated in the series (always in a great way) for longer than an year.

And that was all it needed to be. May got some interesting treatment courtesy of JMS, but it wasn't so good it justified bringing her back from the dead. And what's happening with her now makes me wish JMS had never brought her back at all.Mackie brought her back. Though I will disagree with you about JMS's stories with her not being worth undoing ASM #400 (Granted, i wasn't regularly reading the Spider-Man books at the time, so I don't hold ASM #400 in tremendous esteem.)

[Jim Thompson]

Mackie brought her back. Though I will disagree with you about JMS's stories with her not being worth undoing ASM #400 (Granted, i wasn't regularly reading the Spider-Man books at the time, so I don't hold ASM #400 in tremendous esteem.)Yeah, I knew she was brought back by Mackie, but nothing really interesting was done with her until JMS got a hold of the character. And since he's left, she's back to being her old, cliche' self.

ASM #400 set the table for her to have a powerful legacy in Peter's life -- something that now is no longer there.

[Mister Mets]

Let's be honest here, when the clone saga started, it went really good, sales regarding. And thinking what was happening before that (I am the spider, robot parents, and I want also to add facade) I don't ask why. But almost everyone of the writers that had something to do with it, are considered damned, and generally no one wants to read a story by them. Except DeMatteis, who also everyone admits that if the clone saga had one good thing, it was him.

And killing Aunt May was not DeMatteis idea, I remember DeFalco saying in an interview that they had three big "events" for Spider-Man, one being the clone saga, and the other two were MJ pregnant, and Aunt May dying. So they went for the CS... up until the point they decided "why not do all three?"Combining all three events was a bad call for a few reasons.

1) When one of them (the clone saga) was deemed a failure, it led to the others eventually being undone.

2) It becomes almost impossible for the next series to top these three major events happening at once.

3) It limited the ability of the writers to tell stories unrelated to the three events.

[The Shadow]

Amazing Spider-Man Volume 2 #31-35, 37-45: Aunt May convinces Peter to become a high school teacher, learns his secret and reacts appropriately.
Sadly most of my 27,000+ comics are 3,000 miles away so I can't just pull them out to re-read but this story was one of my all time favorite May stories.

I have to ask (since I can't get the issues in question myself...) what happened in #36 as it's not part of the May story?

[Mister Mets]

Sadly most of my 27,000+ comics are 3,000 miles away so I can't just pull them out to re-read but this story was one of my all time favorite May stories.

I have to ask (since I can't get the issues in question myself...) what happened in #36 as it's not part of the May story?
That was the September Eleven issue.

[ZT4]

Nothing really happen. It was more like Peter you're Spider-man I'm proud of you then she dies. Its touching but thats all it was.

That's all it needed to be.

May isnt this diety-like Marvel goddess who has to have poignant words of wisdom when the big moment comes, she's a regular person that's dying of natural causes and gives Peter a natural, beleivable word of permanent encouragement to do what he does.

Anything else simply isnt Spider-Man, May's death in Issue 400 feels like a Spider-Man milestone, her second conversation under JMS was simply a reprise stretched to twice as many pages and incorporating the retconning of how Ben Parker died (outside the house, not inside it),

[Cody H]

Except writers could have done more with the aftermath of Aunt May's death.That's true. With the clone saga in full force it, the writing team seemed focused on dropping bombshell after bombshell rather than build on more personal, character moments. Hell, Peter's thrown in jail for murder before Amazing #400 even ends. Kind of seemed like a theme back then, though as Harry's death was handled similarly; i.e., brief funeral, sad faces, tear, Maximum Carnage!

[The Shadow]

Newsflash: It DID end. It ended ten years ago.

Keep reading for your nostalgia fix, Spider-Man is dead in every other capacity.

:rolleyes:

I'm still reading a quite alive Spider-Man that has been more enjoyable in the last 4 months than the decade preceding that (and this is someone who liked JMS's run).

[The Shadow]

Please don't post your fringe opinion as a concrete fact. :biggrin:

He also did say "I can't say that..." inferring he was giving HIS opinion on the books and not presenting them as a fact.

[ReggieWhiteJr]

I never did read the Child Within, which if I hear right was a story that focused on Harry and his descent into madness which would ultimately lead to his death in SSM #200. Vermin was in that as well, right?

[The Shadow]

That was the September Eleven issue.

Ah!

That's right... I remember that.

Thanks.

That was the last issue I bought before I moved across the country to where I am now leaving most of my books at home in storage.

[Jim Thompson]

He also did say "I can't say that..." inferring he was giving HIS opinion on the books and not presenting them as a fact.Except for the part where he said the execution was poor. No I there; just a statement presented as fact. :tongue:

(By the by, I'm just joking around here -- which I hope Mets realizes!)

[The Shadow]

Except for the part where he said the execution was poor. No I there; just a statement presented as fact. :tongue:

(By the by, I'm just joking around here -- which I hope Mets realizes!)


But the whole sentence is "I can't say that it was an impressive period. Change happened, but it hasn't been well executed." It's obvious he was referring to the changes during the time HE thought was an unimpressive period.

I thought you were a teacher :wink: :tongue:

[Jim Thompson]

But the whole sentence is "I can't say that it was an impressive period. Change happened, but it hasn't been well executed." It's obvious he was referring to the changes during the time HE thought was an unimpressive period.

I thought you were a teacher :wink: :tongue:Clarity: -5. :tongue:

[Muscles Coleman]

Also just want to throw this out there: I'm loving this thread and how good of a response it's getting. DeMatteis is a great writer.

I do agree with whoever said that at the time, Marvel was just about dropping bombshell after bombshell. Maximum Carnage opens with them at Harry's funeral, and nothing else is said about it. I think a few threads were picked up in Spectacular. Didn't Harry will something to Peter? A box of some kind that they think might be a bomb? And of course the "Gotcha!" reveal after the whole android parents thing. So perhaps it was followed up on. Who knows.

[ZT4]

The box was a "gotcha"

[Red Lotus]

That's all it needed to be.

May isnt this diety-like Marvel goddess who has to have poignant words of wisdom when the big moment comes, she's a regular person that's dying of natural causes and gives Peter a natural, beleivable word of permanent encouragement to do what he does.

Anything else simply isnt Spider-Man, May's death in Issue 400 feels like a Spider-Man milestone, her second conversation under JMS was simply a reprise stretched to twice as many pages and incorporating the retconning of how Ben Parker died (outside the house, not inside it),

Some one else said that it was a nice ending for her character. Yeah it was but it didn't do anything to develop the character she was when she first appeared. In JMS run we saw May deal with Peter being Spider-man and how she reacted and how she was now a stronger character because she knew Peter's secret.

[brundlefly]

I never did read the Child Within, which if I hear right was a story that focused on Harry and his descent into madness which would ultimately lead to his death in SSM #200. Vermin was in that as well, right?

Yes. Vermin's story ran parallel to Harry's during "The Child Within." As we saw Harry sinking irrevocably into his father's legacy of madness, Vermin was simultaneously headed in the opposite direction, trying to climb out of the darkness and reclaim his humanity.

[matthewaos]

DeMatteis is a great writer.

This is all there is to say actually. I can't wait for his new story on my favorite character! I love his work in Spider-Man and 99% of what I have read in any publisher or character is amazing!

[ZT4]

In JMS run we saw May deal with Peter being Spider-man and how she reacted and how she was now a stronger character because she knew Peter's secret.

...Yet when May told Peter he was Spider-Man in Issue 400 (going by the MC2 logic), it had to be assumed from that moment she had known for a long, long time and all the moments where she showed a gradually progressive edge and strength to her character in the 1980s and 1990s could have been a result of knowing that.

You seem to forget May had plenty of development already, Issue 400, as I said, didnt HAVE to supply you with development, it was an issue that was meant to stir up emotion and memory of a played-out character as she put the final peices into place to pass on and leave Peter a stronger man with a full acceptance of life and nature.

I'll go with how the original handled things more than the one that ripped off almost all of Bendis Ultimate May to handle Peter's identity.:rolleyes:

[Mister Mets]

...Yet when May told Peter he was Spider-Man in Issue 400 (going by the MC2 logic), it had to be assumed from that moment she had known for a long, long time and all the moments where she showed a gradually progressive edge and strength to her character in the 1980s and 1990s could have been a result of knowing that.

You seem to forget May had plenty of development already, Issue 400, as I said, didnt HAVE to supply you with development, it was an issue that was meant to stir up emotion and memory of a played-out character as she put the final peices into place to pass on and leave Peter a stronger man with a full acceptance of life and nature.

I'll go with how the original handled things more than the one that ripped off almost all of Bendis Ultimate May to handle Peter's identity.:rolleyes:I thought Mackie & company were responsible for May's new personality/ more youthful appearance, which predated JMS taking over the book.