Too jerk?

[Maltus]

First of all, sorry for my english. I have thinking many times to post this here, but my poor english retract me.

Many people talk about the "no wedding" like most important thing that don't let to enjoy, others says the affair with mephisto is the reason, etc.

For me, they overdid with the comedy tone. Don't get me wrong, i like comedys, but Amazing Spiderman have one magic thing, till now (or at least till short time ago), and does was the perfect balance between action, drama, love, mistery, secret identity problems and comedy. By me, Spiderman was perfect. Specially if you go to Ditko and, most of all, Romita Sr era (my favourite).

Very few few characters have this; Batman "only" have action and mistery; Daredevil same plus love; Captain America; Green Lantern....... No one have that perfect balance (for me).

Today, I think there is too much "bad" comedy for my taste, number after number Peter (and Spiderman) is represented like a jerk: with punisher; with that train girl in waid number; like a photographer in first Martin's issue in the disco; with wolverine in the bar; etc . Not only in Amazing, in avengers is worst (he is only a deux machina to introduce humor, a "buffoon"). I think dont happen in Ditko and Romita era, at least with that insistence.

Dont know if i'm the only one who think that way...

[iddypiper]

Welcome, and don't worry, there are people who agree with you, at least partially.

[Mobey Wee]

You're certainly correct about the Avengers. I'm really not sure why he is there. The whole secret identity thing now just makes it worse.

[RDMacQ]

I certainly get what you are saying, and agree to some degree. I've made the point elsewhere that there has been too much importance put on trying to make Peter feel "young" and I think that this has been to the detriment to his character. While he certainly made mistakes in the past, it seems that he engaging in behavior where he clearly should know better- the Paparazzi arc being the most egregious example. So too the emphasis on making the book "lighter and funnier." While humor has always been a part of the book and part of how Pete deals with things, I think the humor in the past always worked best when contrasted with darker, more serious issues.

As Gavros88 pointed out in another thread, there are a lot of factors that make Spider-Man great, it's never one thing. Part of the problem with the new direction, I feel, is that some factors are being given prominence or are trying to be emphasized over others, and its causing the book to feel imbalanced.

[Winter Bolt]

Spidey is still fine in my book, his humor is pretty much on a regurgitated potty level humor to me which I have to overlook and I focus pretty much entirely on the action in the comic. Peter is a garbage bin of failure and misery that he's been a humorless scumbag to me since he rubbed the magic lamp, and his interactions with his new/old core cast is utter boredom on the level of a very bad soap opera.

Spidey to me makes other heroes look really good in comparison and most of those heroes are messed up people too. The only Spider-Man I enjoy is when he's either written in Fantastic Four or he's minimally used/abused in New Avengers. Anywhere else he's a garbage pail of failure. I like Ultimates Spidey/Pete also but that's sort of screwy now that I may just have to write him off.

I don't like Pete unmasking to the NA and I certainly don't like him telling Cages wife to go fight crime because Pete's an outright paranoid jerk and thought that was a smart remark. Pete is a douche bag, lucky thing I have like a few hundred "what if" spidey comics that "still" happened, or whatever that I can enjoy.

It's all a soft reboot anyways so it doesn't matter. Make Pete drunk, promiscuous, say stupid things, have really bad humor, make stupid remarks, stalk his old fiancée, get his superhero jiggy on with Shulkie and Ms Marvel at the same time... soft reboot. Don't care, it isn't the 70's and 80's any more. They can write him however they want, still epic failure to me, I can't be ashamed by a fictional character. Spidey = Awesome and Pete = Jiggy SOB imo.

[Norman O]

Have to agree, some comedy is fine but every page it gets boring

[whiteshark]

I dont see Peter Parker as being too jerk.
Better yet,as being a jerk at all.
What i have seen in many recent Spider-Man stories,is Peter Parker being more funny in the stories.
Which is fine to me,since i expect to find humour in the Spider-Man stories.

[Maltus]

Originally Posted by whiteshark

I dont see Peter Parker as being too jerk.
Better yet,as being a jerk at all.
What i have seen in many recent Spider-Man stories,is Peter Parker being more funny in the stories.
Which is fine to me,since i expect to find humour in the Spider-Man stories.

I know what you say, and in someway i agree. But are different things "to laugh at me" and "to laugh with me" (i think this is how it writes), and i think they use now the first too much for my taste. Is very ease to make humour laughing at samebody ("bad humour" in many ways) and so difficult to make "intelligent" humour. And there is another problem, when you abuse laughing at somebody automatically denigrate him.

In Ditko era many "friends" laugh at Peter but he was a teenager and, in someway, Lee transmit us that under Peter skin was something more than a jerk. Now Peter is "adult", and time and time again there are jokes to laugh at Peter in a worst way: remember the expressions when he meet punisher, when he learn to drive a taxi, when he win metro ticket, when he talk with train girl, when he went to comisary with DD clothes (and think there were a queue, or tail of a list, for superheroes), etc.

I think Peter is a intelligent man, and when i think in a tone of comedy for Amazing Spiderman i think of him making more ironic or sarcastic comments (specially in Spiderman identity) and less being ridiculous, specially if he is adult.

Don't know if you understand me, i think my english is worst than bad humour in Amazing...:rolleyes:

[whiteshark]

Originally Posted by Maltus

I know what you say, and in someway i agree. But are different things "to laugh at me" and "to laugh with me" (i think this is how it writes), and i think they use now the first too much for my taste. Is very ease to make humour laughing at samebody ("bad humour" in many ways) and so difficult to make "intelligent" humour. And there is another problem, when you abuse laughing at somebody automatically denigrate him.

In Ditko era many "friends" laugh at Peter but he was a teenager and, in someway, Lee transmit us that under Peter skin was something more than a jerk. Now Peter is "adult", and time and time again there are jokes to laugh at Peter in a worst way: remember the expressions when he meet punisher, when he learn to drive a taxi, when he win metro ticket, when he talk with train girl, when he went to comisary with DD clothes (and think there were a queue, or tail of a list, for superheroes), etc.

I think Peter is a intelligent man, and when i think in a tone of comedy for Amazing Spiderman i think of him making more ironic or sarcastic comments (specially in Spiderman identity) and less being ridiculous, specially if he is adult.

Don't know if you understand me, i think my english is worst than bad humour in Amazing...:rolleyes:

There are many tipes of humour,as you said there is the type of humour that comes with a ironic or sarcastic line said by Spider-Man.
Or visual comedy in which Spider-Man gets wraped up in his own web just for example.
Or having Spider-Man being unlucy which puts Spider-Man in funny scenes.
I am not sure which type of comedy works better in a Spider-Man story,it`s all subjective and depends on who is reading the story.
But having Spider-Man stories being funny again,be it in any type of humour in the stories is already something good in the stories and which i think was mising from the stories before BND.
Surelly a balance of all types of humour should be hapening in the Spider-Man stories,but is better to have at least one type of humour done well in the stories that no humour at all in the stories.


And some of the best good spirited people i know like to make people laugh,and surelly by doing that and being laughed by what they say it doesnt mean that they are being denigrated.
By other words when somebody is a adult doesnt mean that people should stop trying to be funny.
There is nothing wrong with being funny and making other people laugh even if you are a adult.


Welcome to the boards by the way.

[Don't pee in the (Dead)pool]

Originally Posted by Maltus

First of all, sorry for my english. I have thinking many times to post this here, but my poor english retract me.

Many people talk about the "no wedding" like most important thing that don't let to enjoy, others says the affair with mephisto is the reason, etc.

For me, they overdid with the comedy tone. Don't get me wrong, i like comedys, but Amazing Spiderman have one magic thing, till now (or at least till short time ago), and does was the perfect balance between action, drama, love, mistery, secret identity problems and comedy. By me, Spiderman was perfect. Specially if you go to Ditko and, most of all, Romita Sr era (my favourite).

Very few few characters have this; Batman "only" have action and mistery; Daredevil same plus love; Captain America; Green Lantern....... No one have that perfect balance (for me).

Today, I think there is too much "bad" comedy for my taste, number after number Peter (and Spiderman) is represented like a jerk: with punisher; with that train girl in waid number; like a photographer in first Martin's issue in the disco; with wolverine in the bar; etc . Not only in Amazing, in avengers is worst (he is only a deux machina to introduce humor, a "buffoon"). I think dont happen in Ditko and Romita era, at least with that insistence.

Dont know if i'm the only one who think that way...

For me, the new direction didn't really turn Peter into a jerk but made him more of a doofus.
I didn't find a lot of the humour to be funny (don't get me wrong, there are some funny moments...) and there are a couple of writers on the book who I really think don't understand the character fully and overplay certain elements.
Roger Stern, Peter David, J.M. DeMatteis and Paul Jenkins are four guys who could really build on the new status quo (in my opinion) and yet the only one working on Amazing Spider-Man at the moment is Roger Stern... Even then he's being under-utilised and I find that to be a shame really.

Oh, and welcome to the boards!

[Maltus]

Originally Posted by whiteshark

I am not sure which type of comedy works better in a Spider-Man story,it`s all subjective and depends on who is reading the story.

Surelly a balance of all types of humour should be hapening in the Spider-Man stories,but is better to have at least one type of humour done well in the stories that no humour at all in the stories.

Welcome to the boards by the way.

I agree with you on this, maybe i'm coming too old for this things. (Por cierto, no me había dado cuenta de que somos vecinos).

Thanks for the welcome.