Adult Content in Amazing Spider-Man

[ronnieramone]

and you know what, i like the idea of Norman Tapping Gwen. It is so like Norman, to do that to Pete.

1) It is TOTALLY inappropriate for this situation to be depicted in a comic that will knowingly be seen by younger readers. It is completely and wholly irresponsible to have allowed that to be printed in an all ages title. It makes absolutely NO SENSE whatsoever for Gwen's character to have engaged in extra-marital, unprotected sexual relations with a man much older than her while in a monogamous relationship with another man whom she clearly was in love with. It is completely assinine and does so much damage to the marketability of the Spider-man property that it should be written out of continuity entirely and never mentioned again.

I am going to continue my list of continuity glitches along with additional editorial screw-ups that should never have taken place.

2) No matter what the continuity is, there will still have been a pact made with "the devil," which is entirely amoral and sends a terrible image to children, upsets parents, and does irreparable damage to Spider-man as a property. Editorially speaking, this was a nightmarish, colossal mistake on the part of Quesada, and he should be held accountable for this clear lapse in judgement. Arguments that claim Mephisto is not really the devil have no merit. Renaissance literature and post-biblical Christian texts have referred to the name Mephistopheles for hundreds of years, cementing the name in the public consciousness as another name for the devil. Making a deal with the devil is never acceptable, no matter what the terms or intentions are.

3) Harry being brought back from the dead with no explanation is simply ludicrous. His presence in the books has contributed little more than turning Peter Parker into a club kid who mooches money from his friends while simultaneously hitting on their girlfriends. It also makes the books less like the major movie franchise, wherein Harry JUST DIED. This makes the current continuity less accessible to a clear majority of potential readers.

4) Civil War was a MASSIVE success, especially issue #2, wherein Spider-man unmasks to the world. The decision was applauded by many as a daring and exciting move, and the book far outsold Brand New Day after similar amounts of national media attention. With the undeniable popularity of Civil War, and the ongoing success of Amazing Spider-man in its aftermath as well as the continued sales of the Civil War trade paperback, retconning the most successful story in years almost immediately has had a negative impact on sales that cannot be blamed on the economy. It has also destroyed Marvel's credibility. The consequences of Civil War were never fully explored and Marvel went for the cheap way out, instead of exploring all the amazing story possibilities that were sure to come.

5) Gratuitous depictions of controversial images for the sole purpose of shock value gags have done serious harm to the recent books. Parents have complained about a number of the full-page splash interiors. The Spider-mugger pointing a gun at the reader confused many children, who were unable to easily comprehend the picture in the manner that mature readers were able to interpret it. Questions ranged from "why is Spider-man holding a gun?" to "is Spider-man a bad guy now?" To have this image (which would be banned from most cable networks) emblazoned on page two one issue after Spider-man made a deal with the devil showed poor judgement on the part of the editors. Other images throughout Brand New Day have also been inappropriate. The numerous images of Peter Parker/Spider-man performing CPR should have been done more tastefully, not tilted sideways for a cheap gag. It was funny to older readers, again, but not appropriate for an "all ages" book. The frontal image of Freak clearly using illegal drugs was also not executed well or clearly enough. Images like that need to be explained to "all ages" audiences, in order to enforce the message that drugs are bad. The book was written so poorly as to possibly be misinterpretted to believe that using drugs will make you invincible and give you super powers. Past stories that involved illegal drug use were handled carefully and responsibly. this one was not, and in fact was rather gratuitous. I cannot read these books to my daughter, nor can most parents do so for their kids. They should not be rated ALL AGES. If the intent of the retcon was to "de-age" Spider-man in order to appeal more to a younger audience, the attempt has failed miserably. The book is less able to reach its target audience now than it has at any point in history.

6) Peter Parker, when he thought he was a clone, beat his wife. This was such a key point, in fact, in people's subconscious, that the scene even worked its way into the recent movie. This decision was not Quesada's fault, but rather than retcon it, he instead allowed the exact same thing to happen in the new books, where Spider-man punches Jackpot in the face for a cheap, and very droll, shock gag. Since Jackpot is widely believed to be, and not-so-subtly hinted at as being Mary Jane, this image is all the more detrimental to Spider-man's character. He is now the type of man that brutally assaults innocent women. This should not have been allowed.

7) Spider-man Vs. Wolverine... did it happen? It seems that if you are going to perform a massive retcon, you would also attempt to try and retcon the story that made Spider-man a killer. If not, then it is clear that Wolverine and probably Daredevil, as well as many others know Spider-man's secret identity even post-retcon. Either way, if Spider-man vs. Wolverine is still canon, then I have a problem with Spider-man being a killer, even if the story was well done, which it was.

8) Convoluted continuity that muddles readers' memories of past stories destroy the suspension of disbelief that is required to make new stories engaging and immersive. While some are able to blindly follow and accept these premises, many others have tremendous difficulty in doing so. Doing a poor job of establishing a premise limits the potential readership. Even when past stories are said to have all still taken place with a find/replace on wife to girlfriend, certain stories do not work, such as the ill-conceived and ill-fated pregnancy that Quesada has said didn't happen. If that didn't happen, what was the butterfly effect? If Mary Jane wasn't pregnant all those months, what was she doing? Did her career take off?

9) Constant derisive references in the stories, written as in-jokes that demean the fans and insult their intelligence have no place in Spider-man. "Tongue-in-cheek" jokes have mutated into "sticking-your-tongue-out" at fans, much of it taking place right there in the books as either editorial notes or situational references to real events or statements. The fourth wall has been shattered in many cases, and it feels like the writers and editors are speaking directly to the reader as though the story itself were a forum or soapbox for them. This is an intolerably poor creative habit that needs to be stopped at once.

10) Clone Saga. If it is still in continuity after all this, I demand to know why.

[Shade 20x6]

1) It is TOTALLY inappropriate for this situation to be depicted in a comic that will knowingly be seen by younger readers. It is completely and wholly irresponsible to have allowed that to be printed in an all ages title. It makes absolutely NO SENSE whatsoever for Gwen's character to have engaged in extra-marital, unprotected sexual relations with a man much older than her while in a monogamous relationship with another man whom she clearly was in love with. It is completely assinine and does so much damage to the marketability of the Spider-man property that it should be written out of continuity entirely and never mentioned again.

I am going to continue my list of continuity glitches along with additional editorial screw-ups that should never have taken place.

2) No matter what the continuity is, there will still have been a pact made with "the devil," which is entirely amoral and sends a terrible image to children, upsets parents, and does irreparable damage to Spider-man as a property. Editorially speaking, this was a nightmarish, colossal mistake on the part of Quesada, and he should be held accountable for this clear lapse in judgement. Arguments that claim Mephisto is not really the devil have no merit. Renaissance literature and post-biblical Christian texts have referred to the name Mephistopheles for hundreds of years, cementing the name in the public consciousness as another name for the devil. Making a deal with the devil is never acceptable, no matter what the terms or intentions are.

3) Harry being brought back from the dead with no explanation is simply ludicrous. His presence in the books has contributed little more than turning Peter Parker into a club kid who mooches money from his friends while simultaneously hitting on their girlfriends. It also makes the books less like the major movie franchise, wherein Harry JUST DIED. This makes the current continuity less accessible to a clear majority of potential readers.

4) Civil War was a MASSIVE success, especially issue #2, wherein Spider-man unmasks to the world. The decision was applauded by many as a daring and exciting move, and the book far outsold Brand New Day after similar amounts of national media attention. With the undeniable popularity of Civil War, and the ongoing success of Amazing Spider-man in its aftermath as well as the continued sales of the Civil War trade paperback, retconning the most successful story in years almost immediately has had a negative impact on sales that cannot be blamed on the economy. It has also destroyed Marvel's credibility. The consequences of Civil War were never fully explored and Marvel went for the cheap way out, instead of exploring all the amazing story possibilities that were sure to come.

5) Gratuitous depictions of controversial images for the sole purpose of shock value gags have done serious harm to the recent books. Parents have complained about a number of the full-page splash interiors. The Spider-mugger pointing a gun at the reader confused many children, who were unable to easily comprehend the picture in the manner that mature readers were able to interpret it. Questions ranged from "why is Spider-man holding a gun?" to "is Spider-man a bad guy now?" To have this image (which would be banned from most cable networks) emblazoned on page two one issue after Spider-man made a deal with the devil showed poor judgement on the part of the editors. Other images throughout Brand New Day have also been inappropriate. The numerous images of Peter Parker/Spider-man performing CPR should have been done more tastefully, not tilted sideways for a cheap gag. It was funny to older readers, again, but not appropriate for an "all ages" book. The frontal image of Freak clearly using illegal drugs was also not executed well or clearly enough. Images like that need to be explained to "all ages" audiences, in order to enforce the message that drugs are bad. The book was written so poorly as to possibly be misinterpretted to believe that using drugs will make you invincible and give you super powers. Past stories that involved illegal drug use were handled carefully and responsibly. this one was not, and in fact was rather gratuitous. I cannot read these books to my daughter, nor can most parents do so for their kids. They should not be rated ALL AGES. If the intent of the retcon was to "de-age" Spider-man in order to appeal more to a younger audience, the attempt has failed miserably. The book is less able to reach its target audience now than it has at any point in history.

6) Peter Parker, when he thought he was a clone, beat his wife. This was such a key point, in fact, in people's subconscious, that the scene even worked its way into the recent movie. This decision was not Quesada's fault, but rather than retcon it, he instead allowed the exact same thing to happen in the new books, where Spider-man punches Jackpot in the face for a cheap, and very droll, shock gag. Since Jackpot is widely believed to be, and not-so-subtly hinted at as being Mary Jane, this image is all the more detrimental to Spider-man's character. He is now the type of man that brutally assaults innocent women. This should not have been allowed.

7) Spider-man Vs. Wolverine... did it happen? It seems that if you are going to perform a massive retcon, you would also attempt to try and retcon the story that made Spider-man a killer. If not, then it is clear that Wolverine and probably Daredevil, as well as many others know Spider-man's secret identity even post-retcon. Either way, if Spider-man vs. Wolverine is still canon, then I have a problem with Spider-man being a killer, even if the story was well done, which it was.

8) Convoluted continuity that muddles readers' memories of past stories destroy the suspension of disbelief that is required to make new stories engaging and immersive. While some are able to blindly follow and accept these premises, many others have tremendous difficulty in doing so. Doing a poor job of establishing a premise limits the potential readership. Even when past stories are said to have all still taken place with a find/replace on wife to girlfriend, certain stories do not work, such as the ill-conceived and ill-fated pregnancy that Quesada has said didn't happen. If that didn't happen, what was the butterfly effect? If Mary Jane wasn't pregnant all those months, what was she doing? Did her career take off?

9) Constant derisive references in the stories, written as in-jokes that demean the fans and insult their intelligence have no place in Spider-man. "Tongue-in-cheek" jokes have mutated into "sticking-your-tongue-out" at fans, much of it taking place right there in the books as either editorial notes or situational references to real events or statements. The fourth wall has been shattered in many cases, and it feels like the writers and editors are speaking directly to the reader as though the story itself were a forum or soapbox for them. This is an intolerably poor creative habit that needs to be stopped at once.

10) Clone Saga. If it is still in continuity after all this, I demand to know why.

^^^^^
What he said. :D

[666andahalf]

1) It is TOTALLY inappropriate for this situation to be depicted in a comic that will knowingly be seen by younger readers. It is completely and wholly irresponsible to have allowed that to be printed in an all ages title. It makes absolutely NO SENSE whatsoever for Gwen's character to have engaged in extra-marital, unprotected sexual relations with a man much older than her while in a monogamous relationship with another man whom she clearly was in love with. It is completely assinine and does so much damage to the marketability of the Spider-man property that it should be written out of continuity entirely and never mentioned again.

I am going to continue my list of continuity glitches along with additional editorial screw-ups that should never have taken place.

2) No matter what the continuity is, there will still have been a pact made with "the devil," which is entirely amoral and sends a terrible image to children, upsets parents, and does irreparable damage to Spider-man as a property. Editorially speaking, this was a nightmarish, colossal mistake on the part of Quesada, and he should be held accountable for this clear lapse in judgement. Arguments that claim Mephisto is not really the devil have no merit. Renaissance literature and post-biblical Christian texts have referred to the name Mephistopheles for hundreds of years, cementing the name in the public consciousness as another name for the devil. Making a deal with the devil is never acceptable, no matter what the terms or intentions are.

3) Harry being brought back from the dead with no explanation is simply ludicrous. His presence in the books has contributed little more than turning Peter Parker into a club kid who mooches money from his friends while simultaneously hitting on their girlfriends. It also makes the books less like the major movie franchise, wherein Harry JUST DIED. This makes the current continuity less accessible to a clear majority of potential readers.

4) Civil War was a MASSIVE success, especially issue #2, wherein Spider-man unmasks to the world. The decision was applauded by many as a daring and exciting move, and the book far outsold Brand New Day after similar amounts of national media attention. With the undeniable popularity of Civil War, and the ongoing success of Amazing Spider-man in its aftermath as well as the continued sales of the Civil War trade paperback, retconning the most successful story in years almost immediately has had a negative impact on sales that cannot be blamed on the economy. It has also destroyed Marvel's credibility. The consequences of Civil War were never fully explored and Marvel went for the cheap way out, instead of exploring all the amazing story possibilities that were sure to come.

5) Gratuitous depictions of controversial images for the sole purpose of shock value gags have done serious harm to the recent books. Parents have complained about a number of the full-page splash interiors. The Spider-mugger pointing a gun at the reader confused many children, who were unable to easily comprehend the picture in the manner that mature readers were able to interpret it. Questions ranged from "why is Spider-man holding a gun?" to "is Spider-man a bad guy now?" To have this image (which would be banned from most cable networks) emblazoned on page two one issue after Spider-man made a deal with the devil showed poor judgement on the part of the editors. Other images throughout Brand New Day have also been inappropriate. The numerous images of Peter Parker/Spider-man performing CPR should have been done more tastefully, not tilted sideways for a cheap gag. It was funny to older readers, again, but not appropriate for an "all ages" book. The frontal image of Freak clearly using illegal drugs was also not executed well or clearly enough. Images like that need to be explained to "all ages" audiences, in order to enforce the message that drugs are bad. The book was written so poorly as to possibly be misinterpretted to believe that using drugs will make you invincible and give you super powers. Past stories that involved illegal drug use were handled carefully and responsibly. this one was not, and in fact was rather gratuitous. I cannot read these books to my daughter, nor can most parents do so for their kids. They should not be rated ALL AGES. If the intent of the retcon was to "de-age" Spider-man in order to appeal more to a younger audience, the attempt has failed miserably. The book is less able to reach its target audience now than it has at any point in history.

6) Peter Parker, when he thought he was a clone, beat his wife. This was such a key point, in fact, in people's subconscious, that the scene even worked its way into the recent movie. This decision was not Quesada's fault, but rather than retcon it, he instead allowed the exact same thing to happen in the new books, where Spider-man punches Jackpot in the face for a cheap, and very droll, shock gag. Since Jackpot is widely believed to be, and not-so-subtly hinted at as being Mary Jane, this image is all the more detrimental to Spider-man's character. He is now the type of man that brutally assaults innocent women. This should not have been allowed.

7) Spider-man Vs. Wolverine... did it happen? It seems that if you are going to perform a massive retcon, you would also attempt to try and retcon the story that made Spider-man a killer. If not, then it is clear that Wolverine and probably Daredevil, as well as many others know Spider-man's secret identity even post-retcon. Either way, if Spider-man vs. Wolverine is still canon, then I have a problem with Spider-man being a killer, even if the story was well done, which it was.

8) Convoluted continuity that muddles readers' memories of past stories destroy the suspension of disbelief that is required to make new stories engaging and immersive. While some are able to blindly follow and accept these premises, many others have tremendous difficulty in doing so. Doing a poor job of establishing a premise limits the potential readership. Even when past stories are said to have all still taken place with a find/replace on wife to girlfriend, certain stories do not work, such as the ill-conceived and ill-fated pregnancy that Quesada has said didn't happen. If that didn't happen, what was the butterfly effect? If Mary Jane wasn't pregnant all those months, what was she doing? Did her career take off?

9) Constant derisive references in the stories, written as in-jokes that demean the fans and insult their intelligence have no place in Spider-man. "Tongue-in-cheek" jokes have mutated into "sticking-your-tongue-out" at fans, much of it taking place right there in the books as either editorial notes or situational references to real events or statements. The fourth wall has been shattered in many cases, and it feels like the writers and editors are speaking directly to the reader as though the story itself were a forum or soapbox for them. This is an intolerably poor creative habit that needs to be stopped at once.

10) Clone Saga. If it is still in continuity after all this, I demand to know why.

You make some excellent points. If Marvel thought that the marriage was the reason new readers weren't picking up the book, then they really didn't read their stories.

[Matt Linton]

1) It is TOTALLY inappropriate for this situation to be depicted in a comic that will knowingly be seen by younger readers. It is completely and wholly irresponsible to have allowed that to be printed in an all ages title. It makes absolutely NO SENSE whatsoever for Gwen's character to have engaged in extra-marital, unprotected sexual relations with a man much older than her while in a monogamous relationship with another man whom she clearly was in love with. It is completely assinine and does so much damage to the marketability of the Spider-man property that it should be written out of continuity entirely and never mentioned again.

I am going to continue my list of continuity glitches along with additional editorial screw-ups that should never have taken place.

I agree.

2) No matter what the continuity is, there will still have been a pact made with "the devil," which is entirely amoral and sends a terrible image to children, upsets parents, and does irreparable damage to Spider-man as a property. Editorially speaking, this was a nightmarish, colossal mistake on the part of Quesada, and he should be held accountable for this clear lapse in judgement. Arguments that claim Mephisto is not really the devil have no merit. Renaissance literature and post-biblical Christian texts have referred to the name Mephistopheles for hundreds of years, cementing the name in the public consciousness as another name for the devil. Making a deal with the devil is never acceptable, no matter what the terms or intentions are.

I think if this were upsetting so many children we'd be hearing about it on Fox News, if nowhere else.

3) Harry being brought back from the dead with no explanation is simply ludicrous. His presence in the books has contributed little more than turning Peter Parker into a club kid who mooches money from his friends while simultaneously hitting on their girlfriends. It also makes the books less like the major movie franchise, wherein Harry JUST DIED. This makes the current continuity less accessible to a clear majority of potential readers.

I'm assuming you read the issue, but if you did, you read it wrong. Peter didn't mooch money off of Harry, Harry insisted he take it. Peter didn't hit on Lily, either. He made one flirtatious comment, and immediately chastised himself for it. And considering Harry and Peter have both dated or been involved with the same women many times (Liz, MJ, Gwen) it's not without precedent. There's nothing wrong with Peter being attracted to Lily. It's only a problem if he does something about it. And Harry died in the comics too. Then he came back. There are hundreds of ways in which the comics are different from the movies, so I don't see the point in jumping all over that one. Hell, Norman is dead in the movies, and he's been back in the comics for about 10 years.

4) Civil War was a MASSIVE success, especially issue #2, wherein Spider-man unmasks to the world. The decision was applauded by many as a daring and exciting move, and the book far outsold Brand New Day after similar amounts of national media attention. With the undeniable popularity of Civil War, and the ongoing success of Amazing Spider-man in its aftermath as well as the continued sales of the Civil War trade paperback, retconning the most successful story in years almost immediately has had a negative impact on sales that cannot be blamed on the economy. It has also destroyed Marvel's credibility. The consequences of Civil War were never fully explored and Marvel went for the cheap way out, instead of exploring all the amazing story possibilities that were sure to come.

You must have far better sources on demographics than Marvel, or anyone in the comic industry, has, if you know for a fact that reversing the unmasking has had any kind of negative impact on sales, let alone an impact that has nothing to do with the economy. And how fully explored would you like the consequences of the unmasking to be? Peter captured and imprisoned for violating the law? I'm sure a "Spider-Man in prison" story is just what fans of the character are clamoring for. Or maybe it could be "Peter on the run from the government". Oh, wait, that's already been done for years in the Incredible Hulk. With Aunt May being shot, they took things about as far as they could.

Splitting this here because the post is too long otherwise.

[Matt Linton]

5) Gratuitous depictions of controversial images for the sole purpose of shock value gags have done serious harm to the recent books. Parents have complained about a number of the full-page splash interiors. The Spider-mugger pointing a gun at the reader confused many children, who were unable to easily comprehend the picture in the manner that mature readers were able to interpret it. Questions ranged from "why is Spider-man holding a gun?" to "is Spider-man a bad guy now?" To have this image (which would be banned from most cable networks) emblazoned on page two one issue after Spider-man made a deal with the devil showed poor judgement on the part of the editors.

I'd tell any parent who complained about this to actually read the book, since it's explained in about a page and a half.

Other images throughout Brand New Day have also been inappropriate. The numerous images of Peter Parker/Spider-man performing CPR should have been done more tastefully, not tilted sideways for a cheap gag. It was funny to older readers, again, but not appropriate for an "all ages" book.

One, I don't think there's anything distasteful about Peter's performing CPR, whether it's tilted sideways or not. But the larger point you're dancing around is that it's presented in such a way as to make it look like Peter's kissing a man. To that I'd say, so what? If a man and a woman kissing is appropriate for all-ages, then so is a man and a man or a woman and a woman. God forbid parents take their children out in public where it's entirely possible they'll see that sort of thing at restaurants, movie theaters, or even on the street.

The frontal image of Freak clearly using illegal drugs was also not executed well or clearly enough. Images like that need to be explained to "all ages" audiences, in order to enforce the message that drugs are bad. The book was written so poorly as to possibly be misinterpretted to believe that using drugs will make you invincible and give you super powers. Past stories that involved illegal drug use were handled carefully and responsibly. this one was not, and in fact was rather gratuitous. I cannot read these books to my daughter, nor can most parents do so for their kids. They should not be rated ALL AGES. If the intent of the retcon was to "de-age" Spider-man in order to appeal more to a younger audience, the attempt has failed miserably. The book is less able to reach its target audience now than it has at any point in history.

That's nonsense. Spider-Man ate a guy's eye. Is that really more appropriate for kids? He beat the crap out a man and made a very clear and direct threat to murder him if Aunt May died. A villain who does drugs is really worse than that? Kraven blew his brains out with a shotgun. There are plenty of examples of things shown over the years that you could argue aren't appropriate for all-ages. Claiming that suddenly it's so much worse because Freak did drugs is hyperbolic nonsense. And villains doing drugs is nothing new. A Code-approved issue of The Flash showed the Mirror Master doing a line of coke.

6) Peter Parker, when he thought he was a clone, beat his wife. This was such a key point, in fact, in people's subconscious, that the scene even worked its way into the recent movie.

Any proof that that's why the scene is in the movie?

This decision was not Quesada's fault, but rather than retcon it, he instead allowed the exact same thing to happen in the new books, where Spider-man punches Jackpot in the face for a cheap, and very droll, shock gag. Since Jackpot is widely believed to be, and not-so-subtly hinted at as being Mary Jane, this image is all the more detrimental to Spider-man's character. He is now the type of man that brutally assaults innocent women. This should not have been allowed.

Okay, that's just laughable. Does anyone other than you see Spider-Man as the type of man that "brutally assaults innocent women"? He punched someone who was sneaking around on a roof. If anyone reads that as Spider-Man brutally assaulting an innocent woman than they're an idiot.

7) Spider-man Vs. Wolverine... did it happen? It seems that if you are going to perform a massive retcon, you would also attempt to try and retcon the story that made Spider-man a killer. If not, then it is clear that Wolverine and probably Daredevil, as well as many others know Spider-man's secret identity even post-retcon. Either way, if Spider-man vs. Wolverine is still canon, then I have a problem with Spider-man being a killer, even if the story was well done, which it was.

Yes, it happened. Why wouldn't it have happened? And, yes, Wolverine knew his identity. He doesn't remember it now. Just like the entire world knew the Flash's identity, and now they don't.

8) Convoluted continuity that muddles readers' memories of past stories destroy the suspension of disbelief that is required to make new stories engaging and immersive. While some are able to blindly follow and accept these premises, many others have tremendous difficulty in doing so. Doing a poor job of establishing a premise limits the potential readership. Even when past stories are said to have all still taken place with a find/replace on wife to girlfriend, certain stories do not work, such as the ill-conceived and ill-fated pregnancy that Quesada has said didn't happen. If that didn't happen, what was the butterfly effect? If Mary Jane wasn't pregnant all those months, what was she doing? Did her career take off?

Because the FIRST thing you want to do after a story that alters things is spend the next several months writing story after story explaining what happened instead. Rather than, oh, moving on and explaining things as necessary. How many people who started reading Spider-Man in the last ten years (Spider-Man, not Spider-Girl) even know that Peter and MJ had a kid? When is the last time it was even brought up in the comics? Hell, it wasn't even brought up in OMD.

And POTENTIAL readers probably aren't going to try to fit tons of stories that they haven't even read into the new continuity. If it were such a problem, DC wouldn't have gained any new readers post-Crisis. Go ask the readers on the DC boards if the Crisis retcons stopped them from reading DC comics.

9) Constant derisive references in the stories, written as in-jokes that demean the fans and insult their intelligence have no place in Spider-man. "Tongue-in-cheek" jokes have mutated into "sticking-your-tongue-out" at fans, much of it taking place right there in the books as either editorial notes or situational references to real events or statements. The fourth wall has been shattered in many cases, and it feels like the writers and editors are speaking directly to the reader as though the story itself were a forum or soapbox for them. This is an intolerably poor creative habit that needs to be stopped at once.

Or fans could just lighten up, grow a sense of humor, and move on.

10) Clone Saga. If it is still in continuity after all this, I demand to know why.

Because the point wasn't to retcon a ton of stuff, it was to remove the marriage, period. That means a lot of things, both good and bad, are still in continuity.

[Dr. Chaos]

I'd tell any parent who complained about this to actually read the book, since it's explained in about a page and a half.



One, I don't think there's anything distasteful about Peter's performing CPR, whether it's tilted sideways or not. But the larger point you're dancing around is that it's presented in such a way as to make it look like Peter's kissing a man. To that I'd say, so what? If a man and a woman kissing is appropriate for all-ages, then so is a man and a man or a woman and a woman. God forbid parents take their children out in public where it's entirely possible they'll see that sort of thing at restaurants, movie theaters, or even on the street.



That's nonsense. Spider-Man ate a guy's eye. Is that really more appropriate for kids? He beat the crap out a man and made a very clear and direct threat to murder him if Aunt May died. A villain who does drugs is really worse than that? Kraven blew his brains out with a shotgun. There are plenty of examples of things shown over the years that you could argue aren't appropriate for all-ages. Claiming that suddenly it's so much worse because Freak did drugs is hyperbolic nonsense. And villains doing drugs is nothing new. A Code-approved issue of The Flash showed the Mirror Master doing a line of coke.



Any proof that that's why the scene is in the movie?



Okay, that's just laughable. Does anyone other than you see Spider-Man as the type of man that "brutally assaults innocent women"? He punched someone who was sneaking around on a roof. If anyone reads that as Spider-Man brutally assaulting an innocent woman than they're an idiot.



Yes, it happened. Why wouldn't it have happened? And, yes, Wolverine knew his identity. He doesn't remember it now. Just like the entire world knew the Flash's identity, and now they don't.



Because the FIRST thing you want to do after a story that alters things is spend the next several months writing story after story explaining what happened instead. Rather than, oh, moving on and explaining things as necessary. How many people who started reading Spider-Man in the last ten years (Spider-Man, not Spider-Girl) even know that Peter and MJ had a kid? When is the last time it was even brought up in the comics? Hell, it wasn't even brought up in OMD.

And POTENTIAL readers probably aren't going to try to fit tons of stories that they haven't even read into the new continuity. If it were such a problem, DC wouldn't have gained any new readers post-Crisis. Go ask the readers on the DC boards if the Crisis retcons stopped them from reading DC comics.



Or fans could just lighten up, grow a sense of humor, and move on.



Because the point wasn't to retcon a ton of stuff, it was to remove the marriage, period. That means a lot of things, both good and bad, are still in continuity.

I love you, Matt (platonically, that is).

One of my favorite posts in awhile.

[ronnieramone]

Matt, I'd be inclined to agree with you on some of your counter-points.
This is why my list was numbered downward based on priority (i.e. 1 being the most significant, 2 a little less so, and so on). Perhaps I didn't make that clear.

I especially agree about not continuing storylines involving Peter in jail or on the run. I did not even suggest those stories. My plan, based on the corner that JMS had written Spider-man into, would be to get a little darker, let Aunt May pass on, and then gradually have Peter come to terms with her passing, in much the same way that he has adjusted to Uncle Ben's or Gwen's passing. He can do it, he's a tough cookie. I also, based on World War Hulk and the Secret Invasion (and the fact that Peter already registered) would have had Peter pardoned and move on to lighter stories.

It seems that few here can concede points to either side. The topic has been built up to be all-or-nothing, my-way-or-the-highway. If fans themselves could come together, we could affect (in our own way) changes in the continuity to suit our united demands. Unfortunately, no one on this forum (or any other I have seen) seems to be able to achieve "bipartisanship."

I could live with one or more of these problems and grievances (except #1), but all of them together, in such a short period of time? Much of the shock content I am opposed to take place in the same issue or story arc within the last 3 months.

If you look at the movie industry and how things are rated there, they actually count things that are inappropriate (profanity, nudity, violence, drug use, sexual content, etc.) and list them, like we are doing here. One or two things might make a G movie become PG (better explain it to your kids). Too much more questionable content and a PG movie might become PG-13 (you really shouldn't let young kids watch it alone), and so on.

All of the things I mentioned happening so close together just make the book as a whole look like a hodgepodge of low-brow gags more closely resembling Family Guy than any Spider-man anyone's seen. Come on, Spider-man's pants rip at the seam and he moons a crowd of people? That's more like Farrely Brothers than Lee or Stern or any classic story. It was done much better when Reed shocked the symbiote off Spidey and he had to wear an old, out-dated FF costume home wearing a paper bag over his head. Johnny, true to form, put a "kick me" sign on his back and the whole thing made the news when Spidey had to swing into action on the way home. Still funny, but less potty humor and somehow the books are classier overall as a result.

I'm also not making up complaints, either. I have confirmed complaints about adult content in Brand New Day from parents in my store. I will get to work on an interview/focus group with parents about Brand New Day for an audio production to prove to folks here that this is a legitimate complaint voiced by real parents. Many of you here probably do not have children, and therefore do not see these things in the same light. Let me tell you, your life changes when you become a parent. I love South Park, for example, but I can't watch it anymore until my daughter goes to sleep. My favorite video game is GTA, but I have to play it either when my daughter is at school or asleep, or out with my wife or whatever. I love Spider-man, but I can't read Amazing to my daughter because it is too mature. I now read her Marvel Adventures Spidey instead. I have read to her the Lee/Ditko issues of Amazing, however, from the Marvel Masterworks editions.

I think the prevalence of questionable material is more significant than any one thing is. Not taking events out of context individually, but looking at the books as a whole, we see a Spider-man that is simply not fit for younger readers. Likewise, making something appropriate for younger readers does not make it boring to adults. I loved the Invincibles, for example, both as a father and as me. Same goes for a lot of family movies, and certainly Star Wars and the Spider-man flicks are right up there.

Amazing Spider-man needs its editors to step up their game and start doing some real work fixing these issues if they are to win back lost readers.

[Matt Linton]

For the most part I'm not arguing that Amazing is completely appropriate for children. I think most mainstream Marvel and DC comics aren't. It's the idea that Brand New Day is any less appropriate that I don't really agree with. Mainstream books have shifted from being truly all-ages to being more of a PG/PG-13 all ages, and they did so quite awhile ago.

And I didn't mean to imply that you were making up complaints. I just don't think complaints are as wide-spread as I took your comments to mean.

[stillanerd]

For the most part I'm not arguing that Amazing is completely appropriate for children. I think most mainstream Marvel and DC comics aren't. It's the idea that Brand New Day is any less appropriate that I don't really agree with. Mainstream books have shifted from being truly all-ages to being more of a PG/PG-13 all ages, and they did so quite awhile ago.

And that could be very well one of the reasons why comic books in general are not generating the same amount of sales as they did in years past--it's because the parents--who have the purchasing power--of the kids--who are supposed to be the target audience--find comic books with characters that are actively marketed to kids more "adult" than the cartoons and even the movies in some cases.

And I didn't mean to imply that you were making up complaints. I just don't think complaints are as wide-spread as I took your comments to mean.

I'm not sure about how widespread it is either, Matt, but I have definitely seen incidents of this first hand with comics in general--four of them in fact. One was at a public library in which a ten year old kid was about to check out a graphic novel before his mom told him, "Let me look through it first to see if it's appropriate enough for you to buy." Obviously, a responsible parent, but do you know what the graphic novel was? Star Wars: Dark Empire. STAR WARS! Another incident was when I was invited over for a dinner to celebrate a friend's publication and I ended up talking to one of the parent's twelve year old son, who was a comic book fan. I asked him if he read Spider-Man and he said, "No, I read stuff like Bone." While Bone was certainly good taste on his part, it was also because he wasn't allowed to read comic that were considered "too inappropriate." Another incident involved my niece when I was reading passages from the DC Encyclopedia. One of them involved the Amazons, and my niece pointed to a character who, because of the armor, she thought was a man. I tried to explain she was "a girl," when her dad said I was joking, then whispered to me and essentially told me that she wasn't ready for that kind of explanation yet. Finally, when I was showing off my Amazing Spider-Man DVD collection to my nephew and niece, they pointed to the covers of Sins Past (I think it was the issue that had Spidey unmasking Gwen's daughter on the cover) and asked what's that about. I told them that that one was "pretty stupid" knowing full well, of course, that I'd have to explain what was going on, especially with the whole Gwen-Osborn love scene. Granted, all my examples are anecdotal, but I imagine that there are quite a few incidents in which parents feel they can't let their kids look and read about the same comic book characters they once read about at their age. Which is pretty sad and also counter-productive in terms of mainstream comic publishers like Marvel wanting more kids reading what are deemed "all-ages" books like what they are touting "Brand New Day" as.

[Mister Mets]

I figured this was a discussion which deserves its own thread.

Ron, feel free to repost portions of your first post in the thread it came from, given that some of the points are more valid there.

[hunter_peterson]

Umm, are you like, 90?

In case you hadn't noticed, political correctness is pretty much bullshit.

It's based on the false idea that everybody has the absolute right not to be offended. The opposite is actually true; everybody has the absolute right to be offended. And if you are offended, you walk away or ignore it. You don't run around and whine about it like a goddamn fire-alarm. That's asinine.

If this huge list of pretentious, homophobic, hyper-conservative bull is really what you think of comics today, for God's sake don't read the damn things. Go read Mr. Men.

[CyberHubbs]

Are you homophobic, Ronnie?

Just curious.

[Will.S]

Spider-Man has always had adult themes in the book although Sins Past pushed the envelope farther than the usual drug addiction type of stuff that Harry and Freak have.

My only thing with Freak himself is that his visual is much more grotesque than any other Spider-villain that I've seen which seems somewhat out of place considering that he usually fights less gory looking villains. This may or may not turn off a certain part of the younger demographic depending on who's buying the books.

[hunter_peterson]

Freak does have a bold appearance, it is true. But he seems to be getting a more defined appearance, and less like a meatball.

I liked Freak's appearance, and he could be a good character with some solid work on him by a different writer.

[CyberHubbs]

I don't know. Venom was fairly grotesque, and I'm sure more than one young reader at the time had nightmares about him. Heck, most of Spidey's villains could induce nightmares. Freak just happens to be the most abnormal.

Plus, he's shown as a needy, murderous meth-head throughout the comic. his use of drugs was in no way glamorized, and I'd like Ronnie to present one instance in which a kid felt doing drugs was cool after seeing Freak do it.

Otherwise, he's starting to sound like one of those people that used to witch hunt comic books.