Why Did The Spider-Man Reboot Fail?

**remoteman** · 01-14-2012, 07:17 AM

Originally Posted by Venomous Mask

I've read that one, and yeah, it wasn't good. Spiderman's met vampires before, yet he claims that he doesn't believe in them. Also, you'd think a guy who'd seen all the other things that he'd seen would be a bit more open-minded.

That was utterly ridiculous. Thankfully it wasn't a major part of the story.

**remoteman** · 01-16-2012, 04:14 AM

Just posted my latest (and last for a while) update, featuring the return of the Sinister Six.

As far as Sinister Six appearances go, this one is fairly skippable - although the visual spectacle of Spider-Man's primary foes being brought together is still there. Some of Byrne and Romita Jr's artwork is pretty great, and rescues a below par two parter.

**remoteman** · 02-04-2012, 01:55 PM

For anyone interested I recently wrote a new part in my retrospective look back at the Spider-Man reboot, where I summarize the first year of the reboot and try to pinpoint where exactly it went wrong. A lot of it is treading over fairly old ground, but its a fairly neat summary of the previous 14 parts. Check it out at the link in my signature and let me know what you think

**Knightmare10880** · 02-04-2012, 06:32 PM

Originally Posted by remoteman

For anyone interested I recently wrote a new part in my retrospective look back at the Spider-Man reboot, where I summarize the first year of the reboot and try to pinpoint where exactly it went wrong. A lot of it is treading over fairly old ground, but its a fairly neat summary of the previous 14 parts. Check it out at the link in my signature and let me know what you think

Good article, I went back and read some of the other postings and reviews you've done and marked your blog in my favorites.

I think one of the biggest problem with the reboot is Mackie was and has admitted in several interviews that he was already burnt out on writing Spider-Man and tried several times to refuse the reboot job but Harris kept pushing it on him and refused to let him turn it down, why in the world would an "Editor-in-Chief" force someone that didn't want the job in first place, force them onto one of your biggest and most marketable characters boggles my mind to this day.

**Venomous Mask** · 02-04-2012, 06:39 PM

Originally Posted by remoteman

For anyone interested I recently wrote a new part in my retrospective look back at the Spider-Man reboot, where I summarize the first year of the reboot and try to pinpoint where exactly it went wrong. A lot of it is treading over fairly old ground, but its a fairly neat summary of the previous 14 parts. Check it out at the link in my signature and let me know what you think

Good article. I have to disagree with you on the Venom stories being good. They had their fun moments, but by and large, it was obvious that the writers didn't know what to do with the character. There were hints of the old Venom, like when he accused Electro and the rest of the Sinister Six as trying to "trod on the innocent to get a few bucks." But they didn't want to bring him back as anti-hero for fear that there might be call for a series and I think that Marvel was in a very anti-symbiote mood then. Also, there was the big missed opportunity of when Venom went to steal Carnage's symbiote. Whey didn't Carnage fight back instead of sitting there begging Venom? It could have been an epic battle, but it's like the writers were going out of their way to make the stories as mediocre as possible.

**remoteman** · 02-05-2012, 01:53 AM

Originally Posted by Venomous Mask

Good article. I have to disagree with you on the Venom stories being good. They had their fun moments, but by and large, it was obvious that the writers didn't know what to do with the character. There were hints of the old Venom, like when he accused Electro and the rest of the Sinister Six as trying to "trod on the innocent to get a few bucks." But they didn't want to bring him back as anti-hero for fear that there might be call for a series and I think that Marvel was in a very anti-symbiote mood then. Also, there was the big missed opportunity of when Venom went to steal Carnage's symbiote. Whey didn't Carnage fight back instead of sitting there begging Venom? It could have been an epic battle, but it's like the writers were going out of their way to make the stories as mediocre as possible.

Maybe 'good' was slightly too strong a word, but I felt that they were definitely better than most of the other stories published at the time. Although the issues certainly had their faults, I did think that Venom's characterisation was spot on (although it was annoying that he longer remembered Spider-Man's identity) and Romita Jr's rendition of him was terrific. I tend to prefer Venom as an out and out villain, so that could be why I found his return to villainy so refreshing. There are of course, far better Venom stories out there however.

**remoteman** · 02-05-2012, 01:54 AM

Originally Posted by Knightmare10880

I think one of the biggest problem with the reboot is Mackie was and has admitted in several interviews that he was already burnt out on writing Spider-Man and tried several times to refuse the reboot job but Harris kept pushing it on him and refused to let him turn it down, why in the world would an "Editor-in-Chief" force someone that didn't want the job in first place, force them onto one of your biggest and most marketable characters boggles my mind to this day.

That is crazy. As I said in the article, it's bizarre that he was kept on both titles for so long.

**satchmo the dragon** · 02-05-2012, 03:55 AM

Originally Posted by Knightmare10880

Good article, I went back and read some of the other postings and reviews you've done and marked your blog in my favorites.

I think one of the biggest problem with the reboot is Mackie was and has admitted in several interviews that he was already burnt out on writing Spider-Man and tried several times to refuse the reboot job but Harris kept pushing it on him and refused to let him turn it down, why in the world would an "Editor-in-Chief" force someone that didn't want the job in first place, force them onto one of your biggest and most marketable characters boggles my mind to this day.

Because that's not true, mackie was just a bad writer, and said that to save face?

**remoteman** · 02-05-2012, 04:08 AM

Originally Posted by satchmo the dragon

Because that's not true, mackie was just a bad writer, and said that to save face?

Mackie clearly wasn't a bad writer. His work before the reboot was generally decent.

**remoteman** · 05-11-2012, 02:01 PM

For anyone interested, I'm hoping to get this series up and running again over the next few days. I just posted a new updated where I look at the two issues dealing with Mary-Jane's sudden 'death'. Check out the link in my signature if you're interested.

**Spider-Dragon** · 05-11-2012, 02:10 PM

The answer is simple...it was the supposed death of Mary Jane.

Mary Jane (married to Peter or not) is an important part of the Spider-Man's life. They complete each other. That's why even now you can't keep her out of the book for a long period of time without it causing people to lose interest in Spider-Man stories. She adds something to the Spider-Man stories that just means too much to leave out.

**remoteman** · 05-11-2012, 02:18 PM

I would argue that Brand New Day managed it just fine, although there was of course a fair amount of opposition to it. I do agree that a lot of the reboot's problems stemmed from Marvel's desire to remove MJ from Peter's life though.

**Mister Mets** · 05-11-2012, 04:02 PM

Originally Posted by Spider-Dragon

The answer is simple...it was the supposed death of Mary Jane.

Mary Jane (married to Peter or not) is an important part of the Spider-Man's life. They complete each other. That's why even now you can't keep her out of the book for a long period of time without it causing people to lose interest in Spider-Man stories. She adds something to the Spider-Man stories that just means too much to leave out.

According to that idea, the reboot was going fine for the first year, which included Spider-Man: Chapter One, an ill-advised poorly executed mystery involving a new Spider-Man, and a few other misfires. It was probably doomed when Howard Mackie was given two monthlies.

Plus, it was rather obvious that MJ was still alive. Hell, two issues after MJ was killed off a guy called Peter's house to say that she's still alive.

**Hypestyle** · 05-11-2012, 08:12 PM

The TriCorp setting was under-used-- the characters were introduced rather dramatically, but then rarely seen despite them being set up as being new (major) supporting characters.. Peter was set up as a hard-luck sap more often than not.. the one guy at TriCorp who hated him on principle was never put in check (whether by Peter solving a problem in front of the boss, etc.); it all ended with Pete being looked at by everybody as a slacker who gets fired for never showing up.. The corrupt/alien senator subplot was overly drawn out and had a bizarre resolution.. Mary Jane dying (albeit with the literal back-door)..