Interviewer: Do you think that made it more difficult to develop Peter as a character because he has to be a certain...

Except that most of the relevant core characteristics fully developed once Peter was maturing into a young adult.

Stupid to have this stance Conway, when we see that Peter's life became more interesting in his college years and most of the impactful drama came in that era.

Peter's main theme is in being a tragic hero and you can get away with most of the stories if the character is mature enough to face them but still being young enough to be a heavy burden for someone so young. That is what I like in the first years and not because he was a teenager trying to balance being a superhero but more so how a real person would react to being thrown into this world of powers and what comes with it.

And I think that if we want to see Peter own up to responsibility, we have to see him grow into bigger ones.

But it was actually pretty good. Money =\= quality.

Source?

He's absolutely correct but people want to see Peter succeed because they like to live through him vicariously, so they'll never admit it.

I'm still amazed that most people haven't realized that Conway was the Slott of his time, a shallow hack carried by gimmicky stories.

The passing of time is very kind to hacks.

>The married Peter Parker is a much less interesting character than the teenaged Peter Parker, and that’s what we’ve seen – the field has taught us that.
This is just not true. The different stages of Peter's life are all interesting for different reasons, and this is coming from someone who started from the top and read through Spider-Man's 616 appearances like a couple of years ago as a 20 year old. I like Gerry's Peter, but just because he's seemingly uncomfortable with writing older Peter (did he not write a run on the new RYV anyways?), it doesn't mean that the character just ceases to work when he's not a teenager. That's simply an asinine assertion.

Slott will be remembered as one of the best Spider-man writers too in 20 years.

Conway can suck it.

No one can name any Slott story arcs after 10 years of his writing. Oh they can name "Spock". But can they name specific story arcs? Significant events? Peter revealed his secret identity to Jonah Jameson in Spectacular Spider-Man, but that was written by Chip Zdarsky. So what the fuck has Slott done? Introduced a midget?

He's absolutely right. Superheroes are juvenile fiction. Whenever they're made into adult, they irremediably turn dysfunctional and the charming growing pains become a case of arrested development.
The adult world needs an adult approach, and that's not some guy in spandex punching his way out of trouble.

Bullshit you can have multiple versions of the same character in different eras and aimed at different audiences. Pre OMD you had the the three main continuity books with Peter married and three alternate universe books all aimed at a different target audience with him in high school(Ultimate Spider-man, Marvel Adventures, and Spider-man loves Mary Jane). There was nothing wrong with this set up. Post OMD you had no regular married Spider-man comic series, just the newspaper strip.

And on top of that Peter in 616 was only in high school for his first few years. he spent most of his publishing history in college which is where most of his iconic stories are set.

And OMD is a morally disgusting piece of filth, should not be tolerated, and needs to be undone on principal alone.

Shame on you Mr. Conway.

>The married Peter Parker is a much less interesting character than the teenaged Peter Parker, and that’s what we’ve seen – the field has taught us that.

Lol

Attached: peterbparker.jpg (919x920, 154K)

What an asshole. Spiderman was static for what? Five years? Continuity was starting to build up by the start of the 70s.
>who the character was for the first five years is more important that who they were for the next 25 because durr durr me write comik durr

Do people still not understand the appeal of continuity? The reasons people get so attached to these long running series is that they like seeing how things change and develop. It's satisfying to see a character grow, not just because it means they grow with the audience.

For fuck's sake, how many children read Spiderman in the 70s and 80s? Millions? These children weren't looking for someone their age, they were looking for a good story.

> If you, as a reader, don’t want to read about a teenage Spider-Man, read some other character
Counterpoint: if you, as a writer, don't want to write a developing Spider-man, write someone else.

>We wouldn’t want to go back and age Christopher Robin – why would we want to read stories about Christopher Robin in his 30s?

Heh

I think he's mostly right. The idea that the things we like as a kid are supposed to grow up with us is peak manchild bullshit. You're the one that's supposed to grow up and grow out of these things.

>want Peter to succeed
>Parker Industries era is absolutely reviled
>High school teacher era when he didn't even have medical insurance is universally beloved

kek. Could you be more of an obvious unpaid Marvel intern?

>the co-creator of Punisher
>a hack
Casual spotted.

>The idea that the things we like as a kid are supposed to grow up with us is peak manchild bullshit. You're the one that's supposed to grow up and grow out of these things.

This

When the big two started to make their comics to appeal to older readers mainly, they lost the charm and fun that traditional superheroes comics had

To be fair, she was a pretty hot midget
Actually, people HATED Peter being a high school teacher... but it was the only part of JMS' run that drew any real ire until Sins Past and OMD. I think Straczyinski just wanted to write Very Special Episodes dealing with high school shit
The Punisher was a one-note villain in his first appearances - he had no real characterisation other than "a bit odd and quite homicidal". It took other writers to flesh out the concept and progress Castle into the vigilante we know and love.

Attached: 1258772 - Anna_Maria_Marconi Marvel Spider-Man Superior_Spider-Man.jpg (729x1000, 51K)

>he co-created a character ripped off from a book that others made popular
>OMG SO NOT A HACK

> >If you, as a reader, don’t want to read about a teenage Spider-Man, read some other character

>Counterpoint: if you, as a writer, don't want to write a developing Spider-man, write someone else

Doesn't really work since the writers and editors decide how to handle a character, not the readers

There's literally no reason why we can't have both of these things at the same time. Just use one title for the "mature" readers and use another one for people who don't want Peter's character to develop beyond his premise.

There should be an Into The Sher-Verse

That was the deal when both pre-OMD Amazing Spider-Man and Ultimate Spider-Man were running at the same time, but some people are whiny and self-entitled and they wanted the main Spider-Man to be how they wanted, not "the other one that didn't count."

Then they ruined both 616 and ultimate in a few years. Great job, really

>a character ripped off from a book that others made popular
Explain.

I like Conway but that's a load of bull.
Sweet spot for Pete is mid 20s, where you can simultaneously be childish but also realistically an adult.

There's a huge problem when you give the audience what they say they want, because story is about the journey. I don't mind if there are multiple timelines or even occasional resets, because it's got to happen. Otherwise you have 70-year old Spider-Man running around.

There's room for all kinds of stories, but the ones that fizzle out are the ones where the hero gets the prize, because then what? The stories are about the struggle. Rich, famous, well-adjusted Parker with a perfect family is just not Spider-Man. It's an interesting Elseworlds story, but probably can't maintain for long as status quo.

I think this all just means that, Peter in different ages has their own appeal. Which is why we have constant renditions of Peter in highschool, Peter new as spider-man, and even different spider-men because of this.

It's just that Peter being a 20 something normal guy is the majority's favorite version of the character. Being the first rendition and longest one affected this too.

We'll never get another JMS run in 616 again unless everybody gets tired of it. And if they ever decide to do another OMD/reboot, they might just make him in highschool again because that's the next favorite version

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Executioner_(book_series)

Well, there's an issue with that, Conway.

You're writing explicitly serialized fiction. Each story is supposed to be part of an interwoven fabric within other stories. Yeah, there are probably infinite stories you can tell with Peter in high school, but when all those other stories "happened" in narrative, then it starts to get recursive and redundant. How many times can Peter fight, say, the vulture for example before things start bumping up against each other? How long can you write things like villain redemption arcs only for another writer to go "nuh uh!" and undo them for some asinine reason?

He's not wrong. Because when you think about it they tried with the MC2 universe as a continuation of that universe and they have stories to expand upon it, but none of them are willig to let Peter go when growing up. And again with Ben Reilly taking over the mantle of Spider-Man. Again they want Peter Parker back

There is no excape from it. So I see their reasoning for wanting to do what they needed to do. Because let's face it. These readers don't really want to grow up. It's the same fan entitlement behaviour we've been seeing

OK, so all cape creators are hacks since the capes they created were inspired by other characters. Got it.

Go to bed, Gerry

What a hack counter-argument.

I SAID GO TO BED, OLD MAN

I didn't say he was a hack because he ripped off another character. You, on the other hand, outright said he wasn't a hack because he "co-created" one particular character.

Deadpool is older than Peter and acts way more childish.

Caps? Nope, they don't help your hackiness.

So co-creators are all hacks. OK, got it.

It's from an old interview

scifinow.co.uk/interviews/spider-man-should-never-grow-up-gerry-conway-interview/

Gerry, stop being a little bitch and go to bed already. You're old, you need your sleep.

Based Gerry Conway destroying marriage and liberating women from the patriarchy! Men belong as little teenage shota sex slaves to epic powergirls like Mary Jane, not with Stan Lee's wife!

Conway just changes his mind about things a lot. He killed off Gwen Stacy because Peter needed a damaged love interest (and because he didn't want Peter married), but then set him up just about permanently with MJ and wrote most of her early basis of a characterization. His dialogue was also a step up from Stan Lee. And Peter's problems in Conway's run aren't "teenager" problems, they're young adult problems.
If he was like Slott, Conway's Peter would be a bitch who wouldn't let Gwen's clone walk away but also wouldn't be able to hold a relationship with MJ.

This makes me want to buy a rifle.

Thanks.

Woah

>>Gerry Conway: Well, I’m of the school that believes it’s not necessary to develop a character beyond the individual story
And here we have the main issues with comics

Woah dude, this is ancient history.

>Punisher
>not the creation of a hack
Punisher is an inherently retarded character that these days only appeals to man babies that wish they weren't giant pussies and could just shoot all the scary black and brown people that are rude to them

>The big flaw that I think the superhero comic business fell into in the Eighties and Nineties was following that impulse, and taking characters to the next stage of their life stories and in effect, creating new characters that may not have been as popular or iconic as characters that they replaced.
Ah yes. We all remember that period of Spider-Man comics in the 80s where he was in grad school/mid 20s that everyone hated. No one enjoyed Peter's relationships with those around him evolve, or seeing him tackle issues that affect him as an adult on his own. I also can't think of a single characters created during that era that people remember or stuck around.

>it’s not necessary to develop a character beyond the individual story.
I agree with this in the literal sense.
>but that's not the character!
I don't agree with this. I think Peter's everyman status and interpersonal troubles made his character far more amenable to aging. I think that's the stuff that defined him more than being young. Superhero comics are just such an amalgamation of creators and shifting demographics that it's hard to maintain a kind of progression with any integrity. I don't think there's anything wrong with a character being held as a stagnant constant with the variables being the stories that surround him, but nothing about Peter Parker is antithetical to development either.

Why is it that the creative heads at Marvel are so out of sync with the readers on this sort of thing? Literally everyone hated OMD, but a lot of people at the top seem to act as if it was the right thing to do and that it was impossible to write stories with a married Peter. Do they think the average of comic book readers is still 12 like in 1962?

Additionally, what exactly does having Peter be married *really* take away from the character? Just the ability to have him flirt with whatever OC you decide to come up with? Back in the 70s they created a bunch of those and no one remembers any of them. The only exception would be Felicia, who can still work with a Peter who is married unless you want to keep recycling the same arc with her over and over again.

So what kind of stories are about individuals with abilities beyond what a human can do which have an adult approach?

We have thousands of years of them. That user is an idiot.

Attached: heracles.jpg (1024x681, 151K)

It's not a subject I'm very interested in (I rarely even read comics with this approach), but there must be plenty, starting with greek mythology. I'm sure there's plenty of science fiction with such characters (not a comic book, but Robocop comes to mind).

Marvel doesn't give a shit about the comics because they know that anything with his face on it will sell like hotcakes. Most kids these days don't even know about the comic book, they just know Spidey from the movies and cartoons.

It should be noted though, that the greek term for "hero" means "individual who does things outside the regular norm or performs a feat almost unheard of", not "fighter for justice and moral virtue".

Oedipus is a hero in that sense, because he became king by patricide and committed incest without knowing.

Problem with this is that episodic comics were disfavored because they simply stopped selling.

What kind or parent nowadays has the money to buy comics weekly or monthly? We've had a recession and there's no middle class.

Reminder that Conway wrote a good chunk of Renew Your Vows issues.

>stop being a little bitch
Says the namefag

Yer not the chuffin' full shillin'?

Attached: 2009.jpg (220x270, 15K)

>But can they name specific story arcs?
Spider Island, but that was back when Slott actually sort of tried.

I liked Dying Wish? when Ock was dying, because the idea of a normal human body giving out after enduring physical trauma like his (or getting cancer from radiation and his smoking) was an interesting enough set-up.

Anna Maria was at least a charming enough supporting cast member as a grounded, no drama tolerating person who was in Peter's secret identity.

Attached: chop chop neurotic spiderman.jpg (660x1002, 139K)

Helped create Silk, Agent Venom, Anti Venom and rebooted Kaine
Big Time, New Ways to Die, Spider island, Superior, Spider verse

Oh good. So he's a hypocrite.

>I'm still amazed that most people haven't realized that Conway was the Slott of his time, a shallow hack carried by gimmicky stories.

Because Conway's stories at their worst are still vastly better than a lot of Spider-Man comics I've read from the 2010's, not just Slott's.

New Ways to Die
Big Time
Spider-Island
Ends of the Earth
Superior Spider-Man
Spider-Verse

Mind you, a lot of these aren't that great, and I think Slott's Spider-Verse is the crappiest of the list, but since the name got used for the film people might look into it. Similar to how Miles would make some people look into the Bendis comics.

Does any of this shit actually require, or is significantly enhanced with an unmarried Peter?

This is like years before Renew Your Vows.

The only thing from the comics since 2008 that couldn't be done with a married Spider-Man is Spider-Man going out with Carol Danvers in the Ms. Marvel series. And even with that they tried to backpedal and claim they weren't interested in each other, which is hilarious because the relationships that Slott and others had Peter in, they had less chemistry compared to the Peter/Carol one.

Everything else showed me it wasn't worth OMD.

>Marvel doesn't give a shit about the comics because they know that anything with his face on it will sell like hotcakes.

Not really. Slott's run was hitting the 50,000's at one point.

Or he changed his mind, considering the interview that OP pulled from was years before Renew Your Vows.

It’s already been shown that married Peter is great. It’s a new dynamic for him that feels organic.

In one universe, but when the character is long-term then that's a different result. Don't compare what happened in RYV to the current 616 version. It's different

616 married peter was also great, you retard

the joke on you, I grew up reading married Parker, and it's the only Parker I accept. Fuck conway

There's two, RYV and MC2 with May Parker.

Attached: 1415892514444.jpg (1000x718, 390K)

People who think superheroes are the same as Greek heroes probably don't know jack shit about Greek heroes, nor their context.

Spider-girl is still Marvels most successful and longest running female lead comic, her connection to peter is an obvious reason but Mayday herself is a solid character and deserves a second shot at prominence. its a damn shame that Marvel is going to double down on Miles though preventing this

>only appeals to man babies
That's every superhero, because they're juvenile characters. You can still enjoy them for what they are, but pretending and/or demanding they take place of actual adult fiction is simply a refusal of growing up. Instead of changing the nature of the stories they read, fans simply ask that the superhero gets married or whatever they need him to do to keep alive the sense of self-insertion and still use his adventures (which largely remain the same as before) as escapism.

not only that, but she's also the most successful, despite being from alt-universe, which means, she was successful despite her stories "not mattering" (to the continuity / events) according to the likes of quesada or brevoort. I mean, if you look at the character history, she literally proved every naysayer wrong, and yet, marvel herself buried her

god, what a babyface

While you're not wrong about obsessiveness in the comics community, it seems disingenuous to just lump all of them blame for the problems for today on what easily seems to be roughly 1 to 2 million people who actually buy the comics. Those buyers have probably been buying since they were kids and like the convolution of the stories and want to see some sort of conclusion come to them. Comics are basically just soap operas for boys, decades long story lines that constantly reference themselves. To disallow that would basically prevent the things like the MCU which only got so popular because they brought that kind of story telling to the big screen

Explain what was so wrong with the pre-omd set up of married 616 Spider-man while also having the unmarried Ultimate Spider-man and Marvel Adventures Spider-man.

I've honestly wondered why Marvel never attempted to push mayday x miles rather than gwen. Then I realize its all about burying peters importance as spider-man to build Miles rather than try to bring there stories together

He's wrong about the marriage, but 100% right about everything else.

The only way you can say this is if you’re also opposed to the action, thriller, or crime genres as concepts.

exactly

Again, it's just a case of arrested development in which the kids don't mature with age, and the corporations take advantage of it because there's nothing better than someone with a kids mind and an adult's wallet.
Before they had to get to the parent's money through their children, so ultimately it was the responsible adult the one that decided how the expendable income was going to be spent. Now they appeal directly to the adults, to the point where children's movies are so full of "winking" to the adults that children can barely have some innocent, appropriate fun. They have to scavenge upon whatever the adults left over for them. The most egregious case is the Lego film, where a children's fantasy adventure gets completely fucked over in order to send out a message for the adults. This also leads us to actual grow ups talking about watching movies like Black Panther or Captain Marvel as being important and trascendental, instead of facing the real issues out there.

TL;DR - Alan Moore was right.

I thought it was more about how much Slott hated MC2

>>No one can name any Slott... Except this!

Why do you even try?

Attached: untitled.jpg (248x252, 21K)

Not at all, it's the figure of the superhero that's a juvenile power fantasy. Those genres can sustain an adult approach to their subject matter.
It doesn't mean most of them aren't just crap. Most actually are an extension of the power fantasy that isn't interested in dealing with the complexity of the human condition but only presenting simplistic solutions to problems in a safe fictional enviornment where we don't have to face any sort of consequences and everything makes perfect sense.

Damn grups not being all grown up like, we really do need a new war or something to focus us as a people again. We're being wiped out by our own childishness and we seem proud of it. I still wanna read spider-man but I also want to just be a grown up and talk politics and enjoy the fruits of my own labor with friends family and loved ones but I do feel trapped in my own head about things that don't matter in the slightest. How do we change?

Why though it always seemed weird to me how big a hate boner he had for that defunct story line. It doesn;t help that Bendis could only introduce Miles through killing peter though it just gave all of them a bigger opportunity to push peter down further

this niggas last project was to develop an AU about the marriage why is he shit talking it?

But Peter was changing all throughout Lee's original run. He didn't stay a high school student. He graduated, went to college, dropped out, got a job, found love. Stan Lee's Spider-Man grew up, he aged and developed in order to tackle multiple diverse situations. There's only so many stories you can tell in a static world, just look at The Simpsons. Development is important and Spidey's own creator recognized that.

I don't know, that's one of the main issues with the last (and next) few generations. I still do enjoy reading superhero comics and such, mostly because I have young nephews and I like to share the experience with them, but I would never demand for them to deal with adult themes. I've got other movies, comics and books for that, and they do it way better than superhero fiction.

>this niggas last project was to develop an AU about the marriage why is he shit talking it?

Read the thread before responding next time, OP is quoting an article from 2011.

Complete bullshit. Think of Dragon Ball, goku goes many different phases during the story, and each is iconic on its own way.

It's silly to imagine a Dragon Ball where goku stayed a kid forever, that's not interesting; the best part of shonen manga is watching a character grow into his best version.

Marvel don't care about Mayday. It's all about Gwen now.

>kills off MC2 Peter in Spider-Verse
>acts smug after resurrecting him right at the end of a lousy sequel that only saw the light of day because of the Spider-Verse film

He keeps giving me new reasons to hate him.

>We're being wiped out by our own childishness
Jesus christ, gays existing does not mean that straight people don't. Fucking hell, leave your house for once in your life

>Once he develops past that point, he ceases to be the same character. Why would you want to do that?
BECAUSE THAT MAKES HIM FEEL REAL AND RELATABLE
DIE ALREADY OLD MAN REEEEEEEEEE

This, but, unironically.

Shitty character. Way to prove his point.

All that while you don't grow up and remain a 40 year old who engages in arguments about whether Goku or Superman are more powerful. You simply want the character to grow up so you don't have to.

How stupid do you think children are? Any child in middle school can understand those supposed “winks”. It’s not my fault you grew up in a Mormon household.

You clearly did not read the 80s and early 90s ASM run, or a lot of the supplemental Spider-Man runs like Untold Tales or Marvel Team Up. Even in shittier runs like early 00s the marriage was the strongest part.

The obsession with Peter being a single nerd in school completely defeats part of the point of the Ditko/Lee/Romita runs. Peter was always maturing, always having to grow and step up to the plate. Marriage and adulthood is a big part of that growth.

>actual grow ups talking about watching movies like Black Panther or Captain Marvel as being important and transcendental
>actual grow ups

Attached: 04.jpg (183x161, 10K)

Back to DC with you.

It’s really funny how despite their obsession with diversity and girl power, Marvel continuously undermines legitimately great female and diverse characters to push unpopular and forced ones.

Mayday literally had the entire package.
>Legacy character that organically comes off of one of the biggest heroes ever
>Has her own rogues gallery
>Had a run that was so long that it established her own world and characters
>Has her own rogues gallery, both legacy and original, all well received
>Actually has a built in fan base that would read or follow whatever she’s in

But yet they keep pushing Spidergwen, Miles, Silk, Carol Danvers, and all these other diversity characters nobody wants. It’s incredible how inept they are.

Look who's talking.

>expecting “muh maturity” fags to be adults themselves.
Either get Yea Forums or admit.

You don't need to watch cartoons or read comics to have fun here, user.

Attached: neat.jpg (140x140, 6K)

Maher pls

Carol Danvers they're pushing because they knew Feige wanted to make a movie of her, and he wanted to make a movie of her because at the time he planned to, she was the only one without any rights baggage connected with Fox, Universal, or Sony.

As for the other three, they'd still be in the same boat with Mayday in that they'd all be used by Sony. But Spider-Gwen is primarily popular of Emma Stone making people far more aware of Gwen, and also the costume. Miles and Silk are non-white which fits in with the diversity push the entertainment industry wants to do.

It's not that they don't understand, it's just that is not what they enjoy. They laugh much more at the humor that's actually aimed at them. This has to do with their interests at that age and not with morality or anything of the sort.

>Peter was always maturing, always having to grow and step up to the plate.

I always thought Peter being a superhero was always an metaphor for not growing up, as it's obvious Peter Parker will never stop being Spider-man and choosing a unhealthy life where is obsession with guilt stalls him from maturing and putting more of his time fixing himself to overcome his juvenile actions of saving people impulsively while intentionally acting like a responsible adult for friends and family who don't know what he's doing as a hero and expect him to put in time for them trusting him.

Make it 3 honestly, I liked married Pete in the 616.

Is that comment aimed at the typo or what?

It was me, so?

Well, Maher was right in a way. Not in shitting on Stan Lee, but in targeting the lack of maturity of newer generations. But I don't feel he was being honest about what he thinks is a problem with society, but it was just cheap provocation by an irrelevant unfunny man. Otherwise, he'd try to elaborate more on it instead of doubling down when he got called on his shit. Though many of the people calling him on it weren't doing themselves any favors either.
The worst kind of arguments are when both sides are retarded.

>I always thought Peter being a superhero was always an metaphor for not growing up, as it's obvious Peter Parker will never stop being Spider-man and choosing a unhealthy life where is obsession with guilt stalls him from maturing and putting more of his time fixing himself to overcome his juvenile actions of saving people impulsively while intentionally acting like a responsible adult for friends and family who don't know what he's doing as a hero and expect him to put in time for them trusting him.

Sure, it looks like that on the surface. But the other user's not wrong about how he changed over time. It's the difference between Silver/Bronze Age Spider-Man and BND/Slott era Spider-Man. The latter to me feels like it was made by people who think Peter never grows up.

But what it is it about superheroes that intrinsically makes them more immature than action heroes, if you acknowledge that they’re both dumb schlock 90% of the time?

Snobbery.

Fair enough I suppose.

Attached: 1581DEC5-3B8D-44D7-A960-F98DBA8A2C8E.png (556x589, 685K)

Unironically the bright colors.

You think there aren’t hacks and shitty characters in DC?

Power levels and costumes.
I'm sorry guys but if you still enjoy films like Predator, Terminator and Commando you are also a manchild that refuses to grow up into the real world where life is about mowing lawns, paying taxes and watching the Bill Maher show while drinking old wine pretending it tastes good with your other suburban friends, wife, and the kids you don't spend any time with to teach them that life is hard and nobody loves them.
Fuck yeah. Land of the adult!

I never said that superheroes were intrinsically more immature than action heroes, they're usually the same. The Punisher isn't more mature than Spider-Man, for instance.
It is also not a matter you can measure in absolutes, there are degrees of complexity. There's also a place for lighter entertainment. The problem is trying to replace one thing with another and try to simplify all experience into a single type of fiction, even if by its own characteristics, it isn't fit to do so.

The punisher is just a super-hero with a bad costume, not an action hero. Action heroes are played by epic live action actors like Sylvester Stallone and Arnold Schwarzenegger which makes them 100% adult male to be considered true entertainment for good audiences.

>The punisher is just a super-hero
user is just a super-casual.

The Punisher is exactly the same as any other fictional vigilante, only with a logo on his shirt. The Stallone and Schwarzenegger movies are pretty much the same too, and that's why they've been replaced by actual superhero films, they fill the same niche.
The problem doesn't come from the mere existence or consumption of such media, but when it's the only input you have, and it is what shapes your cultural landscape. When you get actual adults who think that watching Captain Marvel and Black Panther is actually fighting for gender and race equality, that is just fucking sad.

Actually the difference is the comic heroes keep coming back and never stop while Arnold Schwarzenegger only starred in two Terminators which made them KINO.

>Pretending T3 and Genisys don't exist
We can agree on that.

this

You’re right, user is a casual.
But user is you.

Attached: 7A630B7E-3E9F-4D4D-9E8F-B89ABE8C8B01.jpg (250x250, 12K)

>Arnold Schwarzenegger only starred in two Terminators which made them KINO.
Sad! Also I wish you were right.

That’s the opposite. Spider-Man was Peter taking responsibility over his personal one. Saving lives became a priority over himself, no matter how much he hated it. That was the point of ASM 50. He had to decide whether to run away from his responsibilities, or face them. Spider-Man represents Peter becoming a man, not a child.

No dude actually his responsibility is life insurance, taxes and a steady income for his wife and child.
That's what responsibility is. Not power, not choice, not agency. Becoming the worker bee you were meant to be. A spider is antithetical to the bee. In fact, they are mortal enemies. As long as he is Spider-Man and not Bee-Worker, he will never be an adult.

I can't tell if that's sarcasm or not.

It's layered sarcasm.

Within his world, that's right. But we're talking about a character that has superpowers and he choses to use them to fight evil. That's a very simplistic and juvenile outlook on life. The whole universe of superheroes is ruled by such outlook because it's juvenile fiction, and that's fine. Adult life is much more complex than using superpowers to fight for justice.

>Adult life is much more complex than using superpowers to fight for justice.
No, it isn't.
Just do what everyone else does, use social media to affirm the same belief as the collective, get old, get a pension and then die.
Complexity is the linear combination of real and imaginary elements. Real life has NO complexity because it is entirely real.

As much as I've enjoyed characters changing and growing over time, he's not wrong.

I never said anything about "real life". Children's lives are real too. We're talking about fiction here. Adult fiction is fiction that deals with themes that resonate with adults, in a way that feels both challenging and satisfactory to them. Children's fiction is the same, but for children. None of them are better than the other, they're simply different.
Now, if as an adult your cultural outlook is dominated by narratives that are meant for children, you're not going to have enough tools to face adult life. That's how we get people thinking that watching a movie means fighting for rights, or that "owning the libs" is what politics are about.

>implying child narratives are to blame for modern idiocy
We've had juvenile-oriented superheroes since the Silver Age and there is plenty of non-comics fiction that exists even today. The reason why what you describe is happening is exclusively because of social media.

>people need fiction to coddle them into reality
Not a card you should have played buddy.

Yes, but back then they weren't read by adults, they were read by children. And the reason those things are happening aren't obviously solely because of this fiction, or solely because of social media but a complex mixture of things. I couldn't even say if adult's growing fixation with juvenile fictional narratives are a cause, or just a symptom, but it's not a coincidence. And all these things on themselves are interesting subject for fictional pieces, for instance. But you couldn't tackle them by having some guy in spandex punching people, or some dude in a space suit shooting a laser gun. You'd need other types of narratives for such things.

I posted to this topic in another thread. The Spiderman story developed along parallel storylines in other titles such as Deadpool, Scarlet Spider etc.

But they have since the dawn of man. All civilizations have had their own mythologies and literature. All civilizations, no matter how basic, tell stories. It's an undeniable fact.

>Yes, but back then they weren't read by adults, they were read by children.
Hah, no, user.
>And all these things on themselves are interesting subject for fictional pieces, for instance.
You cut together Watchmen and Idiocracy together, done, that covers it.
Now leave Yea Forums you dumb Yea Forums nomad.

>Now leave Yea Forums you dumb Yea Forums nomad.
Why do you assume I come from Yea Forums?

Cause you're cunt.

>All civilizations, no matter how basic, tell stories. It's an undeniable fact.
True, but your personhood shouldn’t come from fiction. You shouldn’t rely on fiction to develop a worldview. Speak to people directly, if the writing of an author or philosopher interests you try to learn more about them. Read nonfiction. Whether that be zoology papers or biographies, it’s ten times more effective than watching Breaking Bad or whatever it is you do.

Variety is the spice of life, don’t limit yourself a single “type” of fiction, but more importantly, don’t pretend it’s anything more than storytelling.

Stupid

I got into Spider-Man when he was fucking married and I was like 8 or 9. I had no issue connecting with him. Fans don't, it's creators who self-insert into him and want to hang onto their 20s that have an issue with it.

Legit kek.

Attached: 94B803C1-35CD-42E3-BFA0-81CB7333ABD3.png (490x410, 368K)

Well, since we're assuming things, you come off as someone who thinks comics are intrinsically related to superheroes, and who engages in company wars. There are plenty of cunts like that around here without any need of crossboarding, and you definitely sound like one of them.

Too many words, not enough leaving.

It makes total sense when you realize it's just guys in their 40s and up who experiencing midlife crises or wanting to recapture their youth who have an issue with it. They want to be the handsome (but still nerdy), witty, never-say-die hero who has it tough but wins in the end and has lots of hot girls hanging off of him like some kind of harem protagonist.

Fuck no mate, the vast majority of my collection is image, but I admittedly have a huge soft spot for daredevil.

...

>did he not write a run on the new RYV anyways?
I've long assumed that he was maybe helping co-plot and get Stegman used to scripting but that it was Stegman doing the lion's share of the actual writing even before Conway left.

If u dont make your main cast grow steadly , you cant make new one to fit the gap left behind.
That's why the mess with the Champions.

*this thread
I guess I just invalidated my argument by proving myself to be a fucking illiterate. Nice.

It's this mindset that leads to the current state of X-Men where it constantly lives in the past and did everything it could to shit on and erase Morrison's status quo.

>Variety is the spice of life, don’t limit yourself a single “type” of fiction
That is exactly what I'm saying. The need to make superhero comics "adult" comes from not wanting to let go and diversify one's cultural outlook as an adult.

>don’t pretend it’s anything more than storytelling.
But storytelling itself is a key part in the development of a culture and its individuals. Of course it's not the only thing. There is science, there are other artistic expressions (music, paintings, etc.), there is social interaction and so on. But fiction is very important, and that's why it's one of the constant elements in all cultures and civilizations all through history.

As pointed out there's absolutely no loss of having a super-hero also have to be married and deal with a progressing adult life. It's been PHYSICALLY accomplished. Your dichotomy is false.

But what if I’m a filthy characterfag who just wants to catch up on my favorite soap opera because I’m attached to the protagonists? I’m certainly not alone in that. How else would shows like Doctor Who and Modern X Files persist if not for that mindset.

You’re greatly overstating the importance of fiction in the way people perceive the world. It’s important as a release, as something that anyone can do for absolutely any reason. But you can’t call someone childish simply because they enjoy musicals/cartoons/YAshit books, it’s far more complicated than that. Immaturity is a mindset, I agree than anyone who thinks they’re revolutionizing the world my spending fifty bucks on Black Panther and then Captain Marvel is being stupid, trying desperately to make themselves feel important. But those people aren’t immature because they went to see capeshit movies, they’re immature because of their upbringing. I think you have good points, but you’re conclusion just doesn’t work beyond a generalization.

What an incoherent response.

Self-important asshole.

Rereading this post I realize I should’ve seen the signs earlier and just went to bed. It’s too late for me to provide an actual debate.

user, I appreciate your calm and your willingness to talk with me about this subject. But I’m fucking tired. G’night m8.

My point wasn't about a character being married, but the fans demanding the character to grow up with them instead of them outgrow the character. They refuse to move on from their juvenile fantasies, and instead of moving to more adult ones, they want those to replace them.
I enjoy comic books, even superhero ones. I can watch cartoons with my nephews, and read books with them and enjoy it. But they don't replace adult fiction, which I also enjoy.
Everybody knows that the average superhero comic book reader is in his 30s, or older and many of them don't read anything but that. In the realm of literature you can see the same shit happening with the so called "young adult" fiction.
Just let kid stuff be kid stuff, and enjoy it as such if you want to. It's your turn to grow up, leave the toys to the kids and start doing your own shit. You can still sit down and play with them from time to time.

Hey, I'm always glad to engage in actual conversation with someone, instead of name calling and baseless assumptions.

>My point wasn't about a character being married, but the fans demanding the character to grow up with them instead of them outgrow the character.
This isn't a thing. Fans want to either see the character grow as a matter of course, especially Spider-man. A juvenile fantasy is Dan Slott's Spider-man who doesn't grow up. Again, the dichotomy is false because a guy wearing a costume and having spider powers isn't any more fucking juvenile than any other genre, no matter how many sticks you try to shove up your ass about it.

I already said that what makes it juvenile is the rather simplistic outlook on life that superhero comics have, which is intrinsic to a genre that consists of a character with extraordinary abilities fighting for justice, against evil.

It's not intrinsic because Spider-man comics didn't have a simplistic outlook on life until the last decade.

Imo good capeshit isn’t about the punching, rather the interpersonal drama. The powerleveled fisticuffs are not the centerpiece of the genre as far as I’m concerned, instead it’s the secret identity shenanigans and whatnot. But that’s just more spit in the bucket as far as this three goes.

Buddy you’re only serving to prove his point. If you don’t like it stop bitching and stop reading. You shouldn’t be genuinely mad at a funnybook writer, especially not in a genre that gets reconned all the time. There’s nothing wrong with buying ASM every week, but there’s a lot wrong with being a massive cunt.

Ditko was a literal Randroid. It doesn’t get much more simplistic.

Attached: 40EFA32B-04EA-40DE-BBA2-85EC56DE1C36.jpg (490x377, 39K)

That implies the last decade of Spider-Man comics were so shallow that a Randoid's comics look complex.

Attached: 22942DCD-1997-4120-88E9-D4DFDC8A747C.jpg (482x427, 40K)

Yikes.

Yikes to you too

>r. His problems as Spider-Man are teenager problems. Once he develops past that point, he ceases to be the same character.

Da fuq is this Jabroni on about, college Peter was the best Peter

>Buddy you’re only serving to prove his point.
Yeah no I don't have to take this scumbag coming in here talking shit about culture and trying to pin everything that's wrong with America on comics because he hasn't read any of the good ASM arcs and thinks it's literally all just pointless punchfests.
In the context of Spider-man it's downright moronic to present it as a false choice, that it's "move on and read adult fiction, leave superheroes to the kids, or accept that you're stuck on a juvenile fantasy".
Peter Parker has a plethora of serious stories ranging all the way back to his sick Aunt, his poverty, his roommate and friend taking drugs, and other aspects of his interpersonal relationships that aren't directly related to him being a superhero. I shouldn't need to decide if I want to have that or the super-hero action, it used to be the brand where I could get both.
Which is why it's a good thing that Spider-man is a Lee/Ditko creation and not just Ditko.

>scumbag
>he thinks my capeshit is childish
Holy shit you can’t be real.

Adult fiction is "childish". All fiction is "childish". This idiot comes in and starts talking about how adult fiction instills values and thoughts that help shape adults and culture, to be able to handle adult life problems and their complexity. What he fails to recognize is this is actually just another form of maladjustment. Complexity is a fictional concept. God, love, happiness, life, sorrow, family, all the emotions of living beings are fundamentally expressions of a fictional mindset. The REAL world doesn't have complexities. In the real world, the king is the one who has no connection to fiction and lives a completely null existence, performing work, earning a salary, procreating, retiring and then dying. Every other aspect of life we attach to it we do so out of a "childish" need to make life more interesting, more exciting or more fulfilling, as if we do not turn to ash when all is said and done.
There is fundamentally nothing more relevant to the "complexity" of real life in works like Anna Karenina, Moby Dick and the Bell Jar, or Coleridge's poetry, or Dune, or Midsummer Night's Dream, than Spider-Man. Not because those things lack complexity, but because life has none that we don't put in ourselves.

Jesus Christ why are you so angry?

Having read parts of Ditko's essays I think people easily dismiss how much thought he put into the comic. I think Lee is also not given enough credit by his detractors, as well.

I didn’t say that Spider-Man was the entirety of adulthood. I’m saying it’s a responsibility, which men have to take. Peter still had other responsibilities like bills, relationships, and a career, but Spider-Man was all about Peter having to go above and beyond himself and his problems. That’s not simplistic, that’s an aspect of a bigger theme.

you're not just married to your depression, you worship it

Morrison did everything he could to shit on and era X-Men's status quo, fuck him

>immediately pulls a race card with no provocation
See, Yea Forums, this is the kind of people who dislike Punisher.
Do you really want to be like that?

This is what I'm dreading. A generation of writers who grew up reading Slott's shit and think this is how Spider-Man comics should be. With shitty over the top humor, next to non-existent character writing, and being loud and bombastic as possible, who think that raising the stakes as high as possible is the only thing that makes a good story.
Utterly horrifying.

Heroes were often the result of a mixed parentage between a deity and a mortal, which explains why they can achieve things out of reach for mortals in general.

Superheroes are either fully human or alien or whatever. Ironically, Wonder Woman wouldn't be a "hero" in Ancient Greece.

This presumes that the 90's X-Men status quo was any good

I was already worried when Marvel thought the Ultimate Spider-Man cartoon was good writing for Spider-Man.

I always thought the coolest thing about Spidey as a character wasn't his youth, but his potential-- watching him grow. This was why Ultimate Spider-Man was so special to me.
>He's developing his spider sense and getting better with his powers!
>Oh shit, Nick Fury took him under his wing! He could be an Avenger someday!
>JJJ is starting to warm up to him, and the city recognizes him as a hero!
>Aunt May and MJ know his secret, he can finally be a hero with an actual support system!
>Could this kid lead the Avengers someday? Become head of SHIELD? Become something more?
>He's going to college! He's one step closer to fulfilling his dreams!
>More spider-people! Peter could be a mentor and grow even further through teaching Miles about power and responsibility!

There's always a way for the character to grow further. And I don't think that Peter's successes HAVE TO contradict the "itsy bitsy spider" theme of life raining on him just so he'll keep moving.

well no because the Amazonians were bad guys to the Greeks, unless you were a woman familiar with the poetry of Sappho so to speak

I sort of agree. I cringe every time someone says they wish Marvel would kill off Aunt May, for instance.
I'll admit there's been some fun changes in the status quo on occasion, though. When Jonah got elected mayor or when his dad married Aunt May, for instance.

But Kid Goku IS best Goku.
The alien retcons kinda sucked, chinese mystical kung fu adventures was the best phase.

this

i'd expect this from Slott, but from Gerry Conway???

i'm incredibly disappointed.

idk, Conway's era of ASM is pretty much godtier, especially in comparison to what we get these days, and his run on RYV were the best Parker comics since....idk, in a long time, maybe even better than JMS

I know he's old and he has a write to change his mind, but his stane doesn't even make sense? Conway never wrote peter as a teenager, by the time he came on the book Peter was in his second year of university iiirc, so that'd make him 19 or 20; plus Conway has gone on record before saying that he and Peter were about the same age when he was originally writing him, and so his Peter PArker was a young adult dealing with young adult problems.
not a fucking teenager.

Teen/high school Spider-Man is literally 3 years of comics.
it makes no sense for everyone to fixate on that particular period

you know what you're probably right, because after Conway left nothing felt different or changed, so Conway was probably brought in as a big name, and to hold Stegman's hand until he felt comfortable doing it himself

no, not in the slightest.
in fact, all of it would be more interesting if Peter was married to MJ during those periods, except maybe Big Time, but frankly that sucked pretty hard

if this is the idiotic idea people have for spiderman and comics characters now, then theres no reason whatsoever to read their stories for any reason.

stories need to progress, if not end at some point. what kind of fucking devil wants to tell the same story over and over about tue same never changing character.

who the fuck imagines that people want to read that shit?

no, since these fucks could take Peter any direction and still end up at the same end, only to reboot him again and again.
Thing is they stand the fact that Peter grew up even further. Its fucking stupid how these writers always limit themselves to specific writers. Pretty sure he is one of those fucks who hated venom too.

why would we want to read about Peter's teenager problems every fucking time. OH NO I AM LATE FOR now Betty-gwen-MJ wont want to go to the prom with me if I fail
there is more to spider-mans life than something like school. these writers are idiots who limit themselves.

He's right, the character is set in a certain age range and the set up of the character and needs of serial publishing mean you cant change that
The Nero Wolfe and Archie Goodwin stories did this fine, they were the same age and same people in the first stories in the early 1930s as in the last stories in the late 1960s

What would be an interesting experiment would be for someone to create a character who DOES age and change and grow
The series would need to run like 10-20 years if not longer

And those all SUCKED ASS

there was never a limit to Peter aging. if anything he ages from highschool to college. its fucking stupid to ignore his growth any further. There was no limit, it was the new writers who were setting up these rules because they didnt like Peter dealing with bigger issues.

Holy fucking shit, you're so far into your own ass i can't even...

Cause that's the shit the juvenile audience IT IS INTENDED FOR goes through in life?

Its sorta like asking why do the Fudge books deal with feeling funny around girls, and when are they going to do a story about Fudge getting a home mortgage

because even juvenile audiences are fans of adult characters. it's stupid to think kids hate spiderman that he isnt in highschool anymore.

indeedy but a trait of this character is that this particular character is a teenager/young adult

>comics werent intended for juvenile audiences but the ones that are about their age range.
are you dumb or do you simply hate growth at all.

no the trait of this character is being a super hero with spider powers. his age hardly is an issue to young readers in the first place. Hell even the 90s animated show spiderman dealt with Peter after highschool, there was no fucking issue.

this particular character
it would be like a Fantastic Four where The Thing and Reed aren't bicker

>bicker
what?
no this particular character was always about growth. Even in his begining they stated Peter was a growing boy when they were talking about his super strength. All this crap is just shitty writers limiting themselves because they couldnt write a younger spider-man.
Peter has been about growth and responsibility. its retarded to limit that responsibility because some assholes only view Peter as such a limited character.

Strawman argument

You act as if one of the major bits of bitching about the netflixs series wasn't that he wasn't killed blacks or mexicans
Cause it was

did he end up i college in ultimate? I thought he was a junior or senior by the time he died. It was very hard to get a read on how much time passed in ultimate

Literally done in TMNT.
Wasn't pretty.

>did he end up i college in ultimate?

No.

But 616 Peter did most of those things too?

I think he was close to graduating high school, but he never did.