Scout Attacks! Sensational Spider-Man #41

Uhg. I have responsibilities now. There are more important things that need writing, but "One More Day" is so bad that things just need to be said. So, let's just start at the beginning.

The one good thing I have to say about part 3 of "One More Day" is that the art has gotten a lot better. Quesada's got his weird noses under control. However, the covers are still the same covers.

That red haired troll looking thing sandwiched between the "Who are they?" and "What deadly secret do they share?" That's supposed to be the little girl from the story, who is actually kind of cute, if creepy. That thing is just stringy haired and ugly.

Speaking of the little girl, there is some alternate version on Peter and Mary Jane that are terrible parents.

First of all, they let her go off by herself just because she's smart? Yeah, being smart is totally enough to save her from predators. Also, she's smart, but she'd rather be pretty like her mother? Whatever. Stupid comic book.

Let me just say this, I have a hard time believing that any daughter of Peter's wouldn't take at least some pride in being smart. I also have a hard time believing that any daughter of Mary Jane's would be self-conscious about her looks. Also, Peter, if a little girl expresses insecurity about her looks, you assure her of how beautiful she is. You do not tell her she will grow up to be beautiful. I am not surprised that some alternate version of you is an awful parent. You obviously suck at dealing with kids.

Moving on to the less trivial and nit picky complaints and getting on to the more serious reasons to hate this issue:

I hate the fact that everything this little girl is saying is true. That is exactly how JMS and Quesada have been characterizing him since "Civil War." It's like they are saying "Look! This is what Spider-Man has become. Don't you want us to change that? Oh, and by the way, he's only acting this way because he's married. It's all the marriage's fault."

But that is not what Spider-Man has become. That is how they are currently portraying him in order to justify this crappy story arc. This is the worst kind of writing - making your characters fit your stories instead of your stories fit your characters. It is everything a writer is not supposed to do.

I am not even going into those alternate versions of a powerless Peter that he runs into, because they are just too dumb and insulting. I just want to point out the naked girl in the champaign glass.

I'm probably reading too much into this, but I'm just getting this vibe. This vibe of them retconning the Lee/Ditko era to make it more like the freaking movie. I have no words for this, if my suspicions are true.

Back to the bad writing:

I was trying to think of what could make this worse. What could possibly be more random than JMS pulling Mephisto out of his ass as a deus ex machina in the penultimate issue of this arc? All I could come up with is if JMS had actually written the Marvel editorial staff into the comic book. But then, at least, that would be honest. Mostly, this is just stupid because Mephisto's whole motivation for caring is literally that he is the devil. That's it. How does this even count as a story anymore? Also, on the final page, Mephisto says there's a part of their soul that will remember and scream out in pain for what they have lost. What's stopping them from meeting again, and getting married again? So dumb.

I was going to post the last two pages too, but it doesn't matter. The whole "I want your marriage" thing is so ridiculous that it seems pointless to go on. I will say this, though. What they did by having MJ be the one to want to hear Mephisto out is significant. JMS did the same thing when Peter was deciding whether or not to unmask. Both times Peter has dismissed the huge status quo changing decision out of hand, while Mary Jane has been the one to think it over. Basically, JMS is laying the blame at here feet, while simultaneously writing her as if she's the reasonable one so that the reader will be duped into thinking that the decision that is made is well thought out, and ultimately the right one. Well, not wanting her husband to abandon her and Aunt May to become a fugitive does not make her a villain. Neither does wanting to do anything to save Aunt May. It also doesn't mean that the decisions that are made are the right ones, especially when the writer fails to have the characters thoroughly explore all the reasons why the characters shouldn't make the decisions that they ultimately end up making. (I will, however, point out that during JMS's run, he has had Aunt May learn that Peter is Spider-Man and retconned Gwen Stacy's death so that it is the result of her own actions rather than Peter's, thereby removing two of the biggest reasons for Peter keeping his identity a secret. That doesn't really change the fact that Gwen Stacy's death should have at least been brought up in that particular conversation.) But, while none of this makes Mary Jane a villain, it does make Peter a coward for never really being an active participant in his own life. As long as he's not at fault though, right? Because that is what would ruin the character.

I've written all this without even going into the fact that all this magical, mystical crap is completely inappropriate for a Spider-Man story. After six years, that's kind of a moot point.

On a final note, if the next issue doesn't have Peter and Mary Jane giving it some thought, and coming to the conclusion that taking Mephisto's deal is the last thing that Aunt May would want them to do, it will just prove everything I have had to say about this story, and about the whole "Back in Black" story. For once, it would be nice if Peter would actually consider what she would think of everything he is doing.

Peter Parker Was A PIMP

THE WIZARD RETROSPECTIVE: SPIDER-MAN AND MARY JANE:

JOE QUESADA (Marvel Comics editor-in-chief 2000-present): I liked MJ being the girl out of [Peter’s] league. That’s something we can all identify with at some point or another.

Couple of Quick Questions:

How many girls did Peter date that weren't out of his league?

• Betty Brant - the older woman
• Liz Allen - the popular girl dating the quarter back
• Gwen Stacy - scientist/beauty queen
• Mary Jane - model/actress
• Felicia Hardy - the Black Cat. You've seen her. I don't think I have to say more than that.
  
• Deb Whitman - OK, I'll give you this one. She was normal.
  

And the kicker, they fought over him! That was despite the fact that most of them were being chased by guys who, at least on the surface of things, had a lot more to offer them, like actual time to go out on dates and stuff. So, I guess this is my follow-up question:

If a girl actively pursues a guy, is she really out of his league?

Basically, Peter Parker got any girl he wanted once he bothered to show them a little attention, and MJ may have actually pursued him more than most (aside from Felicia, who was needy an obsessive), as she continued to flirt with him even after he and Gwen became a couple and she started dating Harry. The fact that she got all commitment phobic later on is a separate issue.

I'm just getting really confused over where this idea that he was some sort of sad sack who couldn't get a date has suddenly cropped up from. Dan Slott mentioned it in an interview too. Sometimes I get the impression I read different comics than these guys did. Did they change something when they reprinted them? Is there some version out there where Peter was the Urkel to MJ's Laura?

Also From the Retrospective:

BENDIS: I was a youngster when the marriage took place and I received an invitation drawn by Bill Sienkiewicz in the mail from Marvel. I didn’t send [Peter and Mary Jane] a present, but it was marketing gold.

I want it! It's so 80s, with MJ's frosty blue eye shadow. Now I'm upset that my Mary Jane Barbie, who is sportin' the wedding gown, doesn't have frosty blue eye shadow. The irony, of course, is that I hate weddings in real life. Comic book weddings are fun though, probably because there are super villains and I don't have to buy a new dress for them.

Ah, well, I will probably have more to say on this at a later time, because I am me, but I'm done for now.

Seriously?

I found this Livejournal entry via When Fangirls Attack. In it Kate Willaert gives more specifics about the Spider-marriage related discussions that went on at the various Marvel panels (including the X-Men panel - apparently X-fans support MJ too) at Wizard World Chicago, which was only hinted at in the Newsarama and CBR reports. The whole thing is interesting, but this is the meat of it:

I didn't hear any "boo"ing from the crowd at the Mondo Marvel panel, but the MJ marriage once again dominated the Q&A portion of the panel, though you wouldn't guess from the three-sentence summary it gets in Newsarama's report. The CBR report actually mentions a few of the specific questions/answers addressed, but misses what I thought was the money-quote of the hour, which at least Newsarama paraphrases in their aforementioned three-sentence summary. When asked why we need Spidey unmarried in the regular books, when you can read new young-unmarried-Spidey stories in Ultimate Spider-Man, Joe responded that there are all sorts of things you can do with regular Spidey that you can't do with younger, Ultimate Spidey, because younger Spidey can't do things like "have sex, or download porn."

Yes, have sex, and download porn. That is an exact quote...I am not making that up. My roomie crazy_elf_girl turns to me in disbelief and whispers "those are the stories he wants to tell...??"

After he's finished answering the next question (a non-MJ one), I decide to raise my hand, hoping to get him to elaborate on the sex/porn thing. Joe points right at me, but there were two guys in front of me and slightly to the sides, and one of them launches into his question, thinking Joe was point at him...oh well. After that question has finished up, I raise my hand, and Joe calls on me again. My question goes like this:

"One of the things I really like about the way the Spider-man books is set up, is that with Ultimate Spider-man you can read about younger, single Spider-man, and in Amazing Spider-man you can read about the older, mature, married Spider-man, which allows you to be able to tell a greater variety of different stories. So I'm confused, are there really stories you want to do with an older unmarried Spidey, that couldn't be done with Ultimate Spidey-- [Joe tries to start his answer, but I briefly cut him off to finish the rest of my question] --because I don't think "having sex" and "downloading porn" make for real interesting..."

And then I trail off to let Joe start his answer. Which is basically once again asserting that, yes, there are all sorts of stories you can only tell with an older unmarried Spidey, but without being able to cite any more convincing examples.

Y'know, I remember being a young girl, reading reprints from the Lee/Ditko and Lee/Romita eras. More than stuff like Spider-Man's first battle with Doctor Octopus, or anything like that, what I really responded to was when Peter would sneak those porn mags or screw Betty Brant in the Daily Bugle's supply closet. Yeah, those were the good old days.

Kidding aside though, isn't that precisely the kind of question they should be prepared to answer for the fans in all seriousness? Don't they owe the fans that? And I don't mean fans that are upset at how MJ is treated as a character by this editorial regime, or fans that are just opposed to anything that messes with the status quo, though I probably fall into both categories. I mean the fans as potential consumers. Shouldn't they get some assurance that they will be getting a unique product and that it will be worthwhile to buy both comics in the future?

Quesada and company is supposed to be trying to sell us on a concept so that we will want to read their comics, and they are doing a piss poor job of it. Right now, people are so pissed that I'm not sure they will buy whatever Marvel has planned for Spider-Man even if it's the best thing ever, unless, of course, that this is all just an elaborate misdirection. I really don't think that's the case though, and if it is, that's lame. The only thing worse than manufactured controversy for the sake of sales, is false manufactured controversy for the sake of sales.

Anyway, wasn't the whole point of making Spider-Man single again to make him more relateable to nine-year-olds, or some such nonsense? It would be so much easier to be more reasonable about proposed changes to the status quo if the powers that be could actually get there heads out of their asses and provide actual logical and consistent reasoning for wanting the changes to be made. Quesada seems to be getting upset that fans are getting so upset over this issue, but he created the issue in the first place, and if he hasn't been able to speak about it in any rational manner, I don't see why he should expect it from the fans. I feel the same way about when he complains about the personal attacks towards himself and other creators. I personally think that's wrong. It's something I try to avoid, though I am sure I fail on occasion, but I also think that you reap what you sew. When you intentionally bait the fans ire, you are not going to get pleasantries, or even respect, in return. That's just how it goes.

To try to spin this in a positive direction for a second, as a long time fan of Mary Jane, it's gratifying to see so many people vocally supporting the character and the pairing. It's a bit odd, but she may be the most high profile female character in the Marvel Universe right now. It's sad that so much of that attention has come out of negative things, like the statue, all this Spider-marriage controversy, etc., and I'm not really happy that she's probably best known as the character Kristen Dunst portrays in the movies (a character that is so totally not the Mary Jane I know and love), but hey, at least now the word is out there that a lot of people think Mary Jane Watson is awesome.

Whatever happens in "One More Day" and "Brand New Day," at least we have the good times. Spider-Man Loves Mary Jane will still be there, albeit without Sean McKeever, and they can't take away our copies of Spider-Man Fairy Tales #1:

or the Sensational Spider-Man Annual:

And while the marriage might be over, there's always the hope that the new comics will feature significantly more dancing!

Scout Attacks! Spider-Man/Red Sonja #1

So, I wanted to to a post tonight, and it was seriously running the risk of being another whiny "But the Spider-marriage is so wonderful" post. I didn't want to do that. It's coming, I'm sure, because it's all consuming lately. I think I might have to change the name of this blog to Peter & Mary Jane Matter. (I'm just giving Quesada what he wants and I hate myself for it.) I wanted to do something more positive, though. I have an X-Men post that I want to do too, but that's going to require more energy than I generally have, and when I do have that much energy, I have more important things I have to do. Anyway, this is still a Spidey & (sorta) MJ post, but it is one that's made of awesome. This is about the super fun Spider-Man/Red Sonja #1.

Let's start with the cover:

Ah, Michael Turner, your awfulness never fails to entertain. I just want to point out the, uh, pointy-ness of Red Sonja's ears. I almost think that I'm being too hard on his inability to render a realistic human figure when it is so clear that he isn't even trying to draw a human. And in the spirit of being kinder to Michael Turner, why won't somebody write the epic lesbian elf porn that he was so clear born to illustrate? This is actually one of his better covers though, possibly because Sonja's feet are obscured. In the variant cover she is literally standing on the tip of her toes, as if she were a Barbie doll whose feet are permanently molded to high heels. That's a pretty decent Spider-Man he's got going on there though.

The interior's a lot better. First, there's an amusing phone conversation between Spidey and MJ:

First, the nitpicker in me needs to point out that she would never say she is doing MacBeth. She's an actress, and she is in a theater. It's "The Scottish Play." Calling it by it's name is a bigger no-no than wishing someone good luck. Clearly, whatever happens in "One More Day," Mary Jane has brought it on herself by tempting fate like that. But it's Peter's behavior that is more troubling. He likes it when she dresses up like a cat? I'm sure MJ is the fun, adventurous type, but a girls got to draw the line somewhere. If she's dressing up like a cat for him now, next he'll be having her don a blond wig and a miniskirt and directing her to play dead.

Enough about Parker's kinks. Let's get to the wacky, but first, one of the cool things about this issue is that it has more Robbie than possibly JMS's entire run on Amazing Spider-Man. Look:



Two whole panels! And hey, do you think Venom's going to show up at some point?

I've read some complaints this issue was all set up, but I didn't mind, not when that alone is fun to read. If you don't already know, this story is a follow-up to the awesomely cracktastic Marvel Team-Up #79, where a museum exhibit causes a bunch of wacky creatures to pop up in New York and people to get possessed. Naturally, Mary Jane gets possessed by Red Sonja, while some random guard gets possessed by Kulan Gath, the bad guy. Well, all that happens again, except this time the whole city gets transformed, even Spideys cell phone:

Frankly, I think Parker made out pretty good here. Even a small sack of gold has got to be worth more than any cell phone he could afford. Where does Spidey carry his cell phone anyway?

Another cool thing about this issue has got to be the continuity with the earlier story. Kulan Gath is determined not to let Spider-Man and Red Sonja team up and spoil his plans again.

Turning Mary Jane into Red Sonja and pitting her against Spider-Man makes so much more sense than just keeping her away from the sword and thereby leaving Red Sonja out of the equation altogether. Kulan Gath is a genius! You can't argue villain logic though, especially when the final outcome is as awesome as this:

MJ's not even really possessed. She's just pissed. I'm not getting the impression that Peter told her that she's turned into Red Sonja before. Oh, and let's not forget the cat costume thing. As a matter of fact, I think it would be awesome if this was the real lead up to "One More Day." Not that MJ's pissed at Peter about it, but that after turning back into herself, MJ decides that she rather likes carrying around a sword. Imagine how much cooler your average Mary Jane plot point would be with a sword. Sure it was awesome when she beat the crap out of the Chameleon with a baseball bat, but it would have been awesomer if she had chopped off some limbs. And the next time she has a stalker, she could just impale him. Unfortunately, Spider-Man just can't be married to someone who goes around chopping off people's limbs. Mary Jane has to choose, Peter or the sword. Mary Jane chooses the sword, and all Joe Quesada's problems are solved.

Anyway, the series can only get wackier from here. I can't wait.

The Amazing Spider-Reboot

So there were a lot of announcements made at San Diego Comic con International, and many that I want to comment on, but, as always, the uncertain state of the Spider-Man comics is my top priority. And the Spider-Man announcements were big and plentiful, but far more interesting was the stuff that was all but confirmed. Here are some comments from Newsarama's roundtable discussion with the new "thrice monthly" Amazing Spider-Man writers:

Bob Gale: "(Also - Joe assured me we would not be bringing Gwen Stacey back to life. That would have been a deal-breaker for me.)"

Dan Slott: "But now it's time for some pure, New York City, can't pay the rent, can't get a date, crackin' wise, kickin' butt Spider-Man. And taking that Spidey to new and surprising places."

I'm just going to go out on a limb and say that if Slott is talking about Spidey not being able to get a date and Gale was worried that Marvel intended to bring back Gwen Stacy, we've got our confirmation of a mystical reboot, which conveniently only wipes out Spider-Man's marriage, Aunt May's probable death, and possibly the whole secret identity reveal. Is it too much to ask that it wipes out all the Civil War crap. Why not just turn the whole Marvel Universe back to 1986? That would be awesome. We could have Jean Grey back.

*sigh*

At least they aren't bringing back Gwen Stacy. I was really afraid they were going to do that, and the fact that Bob Gale had to be assured they weren't going to do that makes me think that my fears weren't unfounded. I bet it was under serious consideration. Please note that if they want to bring Harry Osborne back, I'm okay with that. Why yes, I am a total hypocrite, but 1) Harry's death was hardly the groundbreaking and character defining event that Gwen Stacy's death was; and 2) I'm still bitter that everyone but Harry got a resurrection in House of M: Spider-Man.

I'll admit that I am really happy about a lot of the things the writers are talking about, like an increased focus on supporting characters, the creation of new characters, and new villains. I just don't really get why they need to completely undo years of continuity in order to get that. They didn't even try to do any of that without rebooting the character. That pisses me off, because I've been saying that they needed to do that for years, and without once ever thinking that the Spider-family dynamic needed to change. As any regular reader well knows, I love Peter and MJ's marriage.

Anyway, I am pretty lukewarm about the writers that have been announced. I don't know Bob Gale's work. Dan Slott's Free Comic Book Day issue was good, but didn't rock my world. I don't think I've liked anything by Guggenheim that I have read (and the fact that he continually reinforces the idea that Wolverine is nigh unkillable in that series will always piss me off about him), but he apparently quit a career in law to write comics, so at least he has good common sense. Finally, the only thing I have read by Wells is Civil War: Young Avengers/Runaways. It was okay, but I think I will enjoy anything with those characters. My no shot in hell picks were Jeff Parker and Matt Fraction. I wanted Parker because I now believe he should write everything (at least he's doing Spider-Man Family), and Fraction because the Sensational Spider-Man Annual was the best Spidey comic in years. Of course, the Sensational Spider-Man Annual was all about how great the Peter and Mary Jane marriage is, so that alone probably ruled him out.

The artists are way cooler. Jimenez was something we already suspected because of the Free Comic Book Day issue, but it's nice to have that confirmed. Bachalo and Larroca had preview art leaked prior to the announcement, so that was already out there. As far as I know, McNiven was a surprise though. His preview art looks amazing. Look at this:

I'm really happy about the artists. And at the end of the day, whatever misgivings I have about a reboot, if the stories are good, the art is good, and I feel like I am getting my money's worth, I will keep reading. It is Spidey after all.

I still have a lot of fears though. I don't know what to make of Jackpot, other than Jimenez's version is a lot prettier than Larroca's. (It's the hair. I love the hair.) I have no doubt that Mary Jane will continue to be the primary love interest in Peter Parker's life, even if we get a lot of him dating other people for a while. Unfortunately, I don't really like the idea of Peter being with a superhero, at least not in the long term. He belongs with a civilian. He's just that type of character. If they plan on making Mary Jane a superhero permanently, I'm not going to be happy. She was already a really cool character. She didn't need superpowers. Also, I think the story would have been a lot more fun if it was done with a married Peter and MJ. I am still hoping it's all some goofy Silver Age Lois Lane kind of riff (Basically, there are two ways I would buy Mary Jane suddenly getting powers and becoming a superhero: 1) to completely freak out, try to avoid it, but finally embrace what she knows, that with great power comes great responsibility; or 2) to just make a goofy costume and treat the whole thing like a lark. Look at that costume. She totally went for option 2.), but Larroca's preview art seems to indicate more broodiness than crack:

Also, if they are going to do a reboot that wipes out the marriage and the secret identity reveal, I would really like them to do some stories where Mary Jane knows that Peter is Spider-Man, but he doesn't know she knows. I doubt this will happen, since they will probably wipe out MJ's knowledge of his secret identity too. (Writers seem to be far more inclined to clueless females needing to be told as opposed to figuring things out for themselves lately, which sucks.) According to Parallel Lives, which was supposed to be official canon, Mary Jane had known since the night Ben Parker was killed, but since that was a retcon, we never got to see what that really meant for her character. There was one really great issue of The Untold Tales of Spider-Man, but that was it. There's good stuff to be mined there. Unfortunately, there's not many single Spidey stuff I can think of that I haven't seen before.

Finally, what's the deal with Dan Slott's "can't get a date" comment? Did he actually read the Lee/Ditko and Lee/Romita eras? Is he talking about before the spider bite? Betty Brant and Liz Allen. Gwen Stacy and Mary Jane Watson. Dude had girls fighting over him. It was keeping the dates that was the problem.

Hey, do you think they will get rid of the organic web shooters? I could get down with that too.

Scout Attacks! week 18: Comic Reviews for the Week of...Whenever the Hell They Came Out

Everything got all messed up because of the holiday and me not being able to get all my comics, and then I had to go to a wedding. Anyway, I'm just going to review a bunch of comics tonight, and then I will review a bunch of comics tomorrow night. Then I will be almost caught up. On the plus side, this week I have pictures!

Amazons Attack #3: This comic book is just bad. Will Pfeifer, if I want crappy political comentary, I will re-read Civil War or pick up some of Marvel's Initiative books. Worse than that though is that, none of this stuff seems to line up with what happens in Wonder Woman #10, or even with the events that lead up to the whole event. Clearly DC editors are too busy trying, mostly in vain, to get their creators to make their deadlines to actually read any of the books. There was one thing I liked in this issue though:

Superman throwing a dumpster at an Amazonian who is about to kill Batman. He then carries the dumpster away, presumably because it would have been disrespectful to leave it on the Korean War Memorial. Seeing Batman sneak around the Memorial is fairly amusing as well.

Detective Comics #834: This issue was a bit of a let down after the last one, but, overall, another entertaining issue. It had some clever gags. We get an explanation for how Joker came to impersonate Loxias, and I am just going to assume that everything that has taken place in Detective Comics during Dini's run takes place prior to the events of Batman during Morrison and Kubert's run. This saves me from having to criticize the editors again. The success of this story, and the real point of it, is the reconciliation of Batman and Zatanna. It's a credit to Dini that he made me care about this relationship to the extent that I do, in the span of just two issues, considering I could not have cared less about it prior to issue #833.

Wonder Woman #10: The best thing I can say about this issue is that it brought us that much closer to Gail Simone's run. This issue just feels like a mess, like there are all sorts of conflicting ideas going on. I mean, what the hell is this?

The tone of that scene is completely off from the rest of the Amazons Attack event. It's so random. Also, Jodi Piccoult should never be allowed to write Batman again. The thing is, I'm still seeing some interesting stuff in what Piccoult is doing. She's trying to bring Wonder Woman to a more emotional place. I think that, had it not been for this editorially mandated event, there might have at least been an interesting and entertaining take on superhero comics here, if not necessarily specifically an interesting take on Wonder Woman. I'm still wondering why DC would go to the trouble of getting a big name novelist to write this title and then impose a story on her that seems so at odds with what she wants to do. Also, what the hell is up with the killer bees? Seriously? Killer bees? Wasn't Wonder Woman being held captive in order to get some advanced piece of weaponry that the Amazons had? On a final note, I really don't think Nemesis is going to die, which is why I am so surprised that they had him figure out Wonder Woman's secret identity so soon. Maybe I'm wrong though. I was completely confused by his monologue though. Did he not get to choose his own name? At least the cover was cool:


Runaways #27: Leave it to Joss Whedon to make the always tricky, and rarely successful, concept of time travel work. He isn't just telling some story where the kids have a wacky adventure in the past, and considering the revelation at the end, it almost seems surprising that it has taken so long for Runaways to have a time travel story. Not only are the pieces falling into place with regard to the events that happened while they were still in the present, but complexities are being added to the characters and the relationships. Even Leapfrog might be more than it seems. Also, this entire page was just priceless:

I think I have a new favorite character. I still miss Vaughn and Alphona, but Whedon and Ryan are doing a bang up job. Finally, while I don't think I have ever met a Jo Chen cover I didn't like, this one is probably her best ever:


Sensational Spider-Man #38: I stopped reading this title during Aguirre-Sacasa's first story arc (and after sticking it out through the entirety of Hudlin's run too), but decided to pick this issue up because I was curious to see what he could have planned for an Eddie Brock story now that Brock isn't Venom. After reading this issue, I think I may have made a mistake. It's not the best writing, but there is a lot of interesting stuff going on and he has a really good handle on these characters. There's a good flow to the narrative, as it shifts perspective from Brock, to MJ, to Spider-Man, and then back to Brock. Brock is losing his mind here, and it is genuinely creepy. I'm enjoying Lee Weeks' art as well. I don't think he was the artist the last time I picked up this title, because I recall the art being one of my major complaints with it. It's also nice to see the original Venom design again. As much as I have always thought he was an overrated villain, he was always cool looking. The new Venom, in addition to being less interesting, just looks dumb (it's the eyes). My favorite part though is probably MJ's speech to the comatose Aunt May. It's no secret that I love MJ, so I naturally like when she's given some real moments of her own to shine. Again, the writing here is not the best (I'd like to think that it was intentionally written as overly melodramatic, because, well, she's MJ), but the sentiment is. I have always been fond of the relationship between MJ and Aunt May, and the speech highlights that bond, as well as showing how much she has taken Peter's own feelings about guilt and responsibility onto herself. From dingbat, party girl who wanted nothing more than fame and fortune, to this. Peter and Mary Jane really are a lot more alike than a lot of people seem to understand.

Spider-Man Fairy Tales #2: While the first issue of this series, was, in addition to being one of the most adorable comic books I have ever read, clearly identifiable as being about Peter and, even more so, Mary Jane, the connection is a bit harder to see in this issue. However, the story here, which is based on African folklore (I couldn't tell you if it is a real folk tale or not), is very much about power and responsibility - the issues at the core of any good Spider-Man story. It's also about the power of friendship, which is odd to me, since Spider-Man is more of a loner, but I guess it's about him joining the New Avengers, much like the Red Riding Hood story was about Peter and MJ's marriage. Maybe the next issue will be a fairy tale version of "Sins Past" and then the mini series will wrap up with a Native American folklore rendition of "The Other." Then we will have JMS's whole Amazing Spider-Man run in the far more entertaining fairy tale form. Kidding aside though, the thing that makes this issue worthwhile is Niko Henrichon's art.

X-Men: Endangered Species: I'm not a fan of the fact that the mutant population has been cut down to only 198 (and now less). I think it ruins the metaphor of mutants as a minority group. (Quite frankly, if there are less than 200 of them in the world and there cannot be any more of them born, they're basically irrelevant on a societal scale.) I also didn't think that a lot of the things that happened to the mutant population in the wake of House of M made much sense. (I guess Marvel was going for an analogy to Native Americans being put on reservations, but it really didn't work because the issues leading up to it were so completely different.) All that considered, I was surprised to find myself actually interested in where Carey is going to take this. While I do think the essence of what Marvel's mutant population has always been representative of has been completely undermined, the population dilemma that the X-Men are facing is an interesting one. (I'll also add that it's long overdue for the X-books to be dealing with it.) Carey also handles the characters quite well here, providing several good moments, particularly the conversations between Professor X and Sebastian Shaw and Cyclops and Wolverine. All this adds up to me having to start reading X-Men comics again, which really, really sucks. Also, how skanky is it to wear fishnet stockings to a funeral?

Please, No

From this week's Lying in the Gutters:

ONCE BYRNED

A while ago, John Byrne talked about an idea he'd had with Howard Mackie to "reset" Spider-Man continuity. First they would have put Peter Parker through the worst of it, until he considers ending it all. At that point, he'd find himself on the bridge where Gwen Stacy died, offering his soul if the clock could have been turned back to simpler times. At which point the Shaper Of Worlds does just that, remaking Spider-Man's world to when he was back in High School, but with the current book's supporting cast, taking place in the modern day. Eventually confronting the Shaper, he discovers nothing can be changed, and his memories of the old world slowly fade away. The team decided though that this kind of event would be too "cosmic" for Spider-Man, who has a "street level" tone.

Well, while Byrne may be out of favour at Marvel (or vice versa), his ideas may still see the light of day. Coincidence of course, these things usually are - google "ideaspace" for further discussion. That is all for now.

This is pretty much my worst nightmare. Well, not really, because that would involve some combination of sharks, wax figures, Parmalat, and Critters. This is my worst nightmare when it comes to potential outcomes of the upcoming Spider-Man arc "One More Day" (which I always want to call "One Day More" because of the song from Les Miserables). And it seems like an ever increasing likelihood that it's going to happen, when you take into consideration the fact that a similar un-writing of Spider-Man history appeared in Lying in the Gutters several months back (I can't be bothered to search for it now, but it was a scenario that involved a new character introduced in the Ms. Marvel Annual), my own observations in my review for New Avengers: Illuminati #3, and even the appearance of the new character Jackpot in Dan Slott, the guy who is probably going to be taking over Amazing Spider-Man Free Comic Book Day story "Swing Shift."

I guess I just don't understand why Spider-Man being married is such a big deal. Personally, I happen to like the marriage and always have. Since I have been reading since I was nine-years-old and Peter and Mary Jane have been married that whole time, the argument that kids can't relate to a married Peter Parker always seems a bit weird to me. If anything, I think most nine-year-olds probably assume they will be married by the time they are Peter's age. I know I did. Whereas now, at roughly the same age as Peter, the whole idea of marriage is increasingly foreign to me, yet I still like the fact that Peter Parker is married. I like who he's married to too, despite the fact that she's a super model. (I'm not even going to get into the constant remarks like "How bad could his life be? He's married to a super model" made by certain writers and editors. It gets me far too annoyed.)

Even more than my personal feelings about Peter Parker's marriage, which I could go into far more depth about, I do not really see how ending the marriage could be so all important that Marvel would damage the integrity of the character and company just to make it go away. Isn't the fact that Marvel didn't do stuff like this supposed to be one of the things that set them apart from the Distinguished Competition, not to mention a key part of the more reality based storytelling they have always prided themselves on? If this happens, I guess it will show that it's just a slippery slope from Wanda uttering "No more mutants!" to completely throwing out 40+ years of continuity and character development.

It also doesn't make much sense to me because there already is a version of Spider-Man who will never grow up. He won't even ever leave high school. Wouldn't this kind of thing render Ultimate Spider-Man completely pointless? (One could argue that Marvel is making the whole Ultimate line pointless with the recent developments in the main Marvel Universe, but since it still has a Captain America and as much of an ass as Ultimate Tony Stark is, he is not crossed the line into supervillain territory, I don't hold with that opinion.) There's also Spider-Man Adventures, which is targeted at younger readers. It's odd to me that, with a number of alternatives, Marvel wouldn't want to appease all fans, by at least keeping the current continuity intact, even if they still wanted to end the marriage through divorce or, loathe as I am to even mention it, death. This is what gives me hope that Marvel won't take this road though, because they do seem to want to appeal to all the different Spider-Man fan preferences. Still, the fact that this rumor gets floated repeatedly, combined with the fact that there are so many pieces in place for them to do something like this is troubling simply because it indicates that Marvel editorial has given it serious thought, which in my not so humble opinion it does not warrant. This is Spider-Man, people. This sort of thing does not suite him. Unfortunately, I might argue that mystical totems don't really suite him either.

Even as a fan of the marriage, I could have been OK with the divorce scenario. Done well, it could have opened up both Peter and MJ for some interesting personal stories while still keeping MJ in the picture as 1) a close friend that knows Peter's secret (now a moot point, I know) and he can confide in, and 2) a love interest, since divorce in no way precludes a potential reunion and Mary Jane has pretty much become Marvel's Lois Lane thanks to the movies. It's been pretty obvious for a while now though that divorce isn't an option for these two. Their post-separation relationship has been stronger than ever, and the Sensational Spider-Man Annual clearly illustrated that neither one of them are giving up on their marriage. That still, of course, leaves the option of Mary Jane's death, which despite the sinking feeling I got when I finished reading the Sensational Spider-Man Annual, I still don't believe is going to happen. The movies have made her too well known. Anyway, Mary Jane's been dead before, and it didn't really work out well for the Spider-Man titles.

Personally, I don't have much interest in reading about a perpetually young Peter Parker that never moves forward. Maybe it's because I myself am an adult now, but I have always liked the fact that Peter Parker was the one character that has really grown and matured through the years, experiencing various stages of life and the dilemmas that they hold. I think it adds to his status as the "everyman" character. Furthermore, I think it is much truer to the character that Stan Lee created, a character who aged in real time for his first five years of existence before the publisher made Stan Lee slow it down. Here's a quote from Write Now #14 (January 2007):

STAN: Yeah, I thought it would be great to have him age in real time. I never really knew that it couldn't be done. You may recall, after high school I put him in college and then after he'd been there for a few years I made him a grad student. Later we had him get married--or maybe it was earlier. I can't quite remember. I'd have eventually had MJ get pregnant also. However, Martin Goodman, the publisher, didn't want him to age in real time so that put a stop to it.

(Sidenote: I don't think Peter graduated college until Len Wein's run from 1975 to 1978.) I actually believe that it was a good thing to not have Spidey age in real time, since it allowed to more fully examine the story potential, but eventually, the story gets played out and it's time to move the character forward. I love coming of age tales, especially when it comes to superheroes, and Spider-Man was probably the best. However, the whole point of a coming of age tale is that the character eventually comes of age. If one tries to hold the character in place for too long, he or she stops seeming like a kid who is making normal mistakes and growing and learning from them, and more like an idiot. To me, that's a great deal more unrelatable than a protagonist who is from a different age group as myself, as it tends to make the character downright unlikeable.

I would prefer to see the character move forward. He's just unmasked, which I am not all that keen on, since another thing I see as essential to the character that Stan Lee created is the duality of Peter Parker and Spider-Man, but it would have been nice to see that fully explored before changing everything yet again, or resetting it, as the case might turn out to be. As I said, I could have been OK with a divorce had the story remained true to the characters of Peter and Mary Jane, and I am still a bit bitter about what happened to baby May back when they actually did broach the subject of them having a child before jettisoning it never to be mentioned again like everything else that happened during the second Clone Saga.

Anyway, it's hard to take any argument about marriage making Peter too old and unrelatable seriously when it comes from the people who made him a teacher, the ultimate symbol of being an old and unrelatable authority figure for any child and probably more than a few adults. For now though, I am just going to have to chalk these rumors and suspicions up on my list of things that are making me not look forward to "One More Day" along with Joe Quesada's ugly ass art. Why take ideas from Byrne and Mackie anyway? Their run sucked and didn't sell well.

Scout Attacks! week 14: To Grandmother's House I Go

I'm thinking my favorite comic of the week will be as much of a surprise to you as it was to me. It really had no right to be as good as it was.

Countdown #48: This issue wasn't as good as last week's, but it's held my attention for at least another week. I really want to see what's going to happen with Mary Marvel and Black Adam, since he's still got my interest held over from 52. Also, Jimmy Olsen had superspeed this week, so I really want to know what the deal is with his spontaneously appearing powers. Finally, something shadowy and mysterious killed a New God named Lightray. Superman got very melodramatic about it, finishing his sentences in big red letters. They're setting up a lot of potentially interesting things here, it's just not nearly as accessible as 52 was and far less character driven, which was the real strength of that series. All that is making it a bit difficult to get really invested in this series, especially since so much of it is interwoven with what is going on in the rest of the DCU.

Action Comics #850: Renato Guedes is back! I love him. Seriously. I want to marry this art and have its babies. OK. That's an exaggeration. I want to marry John Cassaday's art and have its babies. This art can be my starter marriage. Anyway, this anniversary issue was a nice look at Superman continuity as it stands now in the One Year Later DCU, without giving everything a way so there's still plenty to reveal in the year(s) to come, which is why it makes sense that this issue was written by the three main Superman writers. Also, we got to see Krypto, which was cool (but also a dirty tease since we are still waiting on Busiek's Krypto story), and the look at all the different versions of Superman was a lot of fun. This issue gets bonus points for making fun of his 1990s hair style. I love stories that touch on Superman's isolation. The way the story jumped around, it was hard to get a really capitalize on the emotion of that, but they did a good job of capturing what his life is like in a few key moments. I thought the scene where Flash asked for his autograph, showing that even the other superheroes see him as something other, and his dinner with Lois were especially poignant. What this story did an excellent job of showing was how Supergirl came to understand her cousin better and how much it must mean to him to have her in his life now. I'm sure it's not to everyone's liking, but I find the interaction between them to be pretty realistically familial.

Amazons Attack #2: I think this issue made it pretty clear that there's something wrong with Hippolyta, since even the other Amazons are questioning her judgment now. I'm guessing she's either not really Hippolyta or Circe brought her back from the dead wrong somehow. If this was Marvel, I would say she was a zombie. I liked the first issue of this series, but now it just seems superfluous. What exactly is being provided here that's necessary to the story that we are not getting in Wonder Woman? I suppose we're getting to see what the other superheroes are doing, but since they're really not doing much, it doesn't seem like we needed to see more of them than we did in the last issue of Wonder Woman. We did get the obligatory scene where Batman questioned Wonder Woman's loyalty. Just once I would love to see the inevitable moment of silence while Batman decides whether or not he believes the other person to end with him saying "I'm just messin' with ya. Pretending to be the old un-trusting asshole I used to be. Bad joke. Sorry. My old Bat-dick days are way behind me." It's never going to happen though. The big cliffhanger is Superman rushing off to Kansas to save his parents. Whatever. They're not going to die. They're going to survive so that later in the year Jonathan Kent can die of a heart attack.

Justice Society of America #6: This was a weird issue because a ton of stuff happened, but also nothing at all happened. And the only thing I know about the Legion of Superheroes is what I have learned from the Saturday morning cartoon (I'll miss you Ferro Lad. *sniffle*), so all that stuff was really confusing to me. What I did learn this issue is that Liberty Belle is one of those obnoxious newly married people who want to marry off everyone else. I did like the reference to Kingdom Come (Earth 22) and he fact that the Multiverse is what messed up Starman's head. I do think something fairly intriguing is being set up here between this crossover and Countdown with regard to all that and I just think it sucks that it's going to take all year to get to the bottom of it. There's also a really cool fight with a robot tentacle monster, who I think the reader is expected to recognize as someone, but I don't. It still looks great though. I kind of love Eaglesham's art. He's draws really pretty men too. I'm just saying. His Karate Kid could totally land a starring role on a CW show.

New Avengers Illuminati: This issue had a huge retcon with regard to the Beyonder, and frankly, my memory isn't good enough to say whether it worked or not. Being free of the burdens of continuity as I am, this was a pretty enjoyable issue. Not as good as the first two, but interesting. (It's also possible that I would enjoy anything with Jim Cheung's art, since I'm still in Young Avengers withdrawal after all this time.) I really liked Black Bolt here with his struggle to remember, and also Namor's understanding of how to deal with the Beyonder because he was the only one who understood how a king relates to his subject, and vice versa. That was a nice touch. I am curious on one point though. Am I missing a crucial part of Dr. Strange's backstory with regard to his love interests or is his greatest desire simply to have a threesome? That seems a little unambitious, considering Namor wants to take over the surface world. Finally, while I'm enjoying this series, I'm concerned about where exactly it is heading. With the gems from the Infinity Gauntlet divided between the members of the Illuminati, all of whom are about to get their asses kicked by the Hulk, and the Beyonder running around somewhere on Earth, it seems like the pieces are being put into place for Marvel to pull their own version of Superboy Prime punching time.

Spider-Man Fairy Tales #1: I fully admit to being a complete sucker for Spidey. I've gotten better over the years. I don't feel the need to pick up every single comic with him in it. I've gotten so good that I am currently only reading one of his monthly titles (though the urge to pick up the other 2 main Marvel universe titles is strong), but when something new comes out I am physically compelled to at least give it a try. What I am saying is, I didn't want to buy this comic book. I had to buy this comic book, and I am so glad I did. It was by far the most enjoyable thing I read this week, and it was a fairly decent week. Anyway, I loved it. It was adorable. I want this to officially replace the actual Little Red Riding Hood story as the one that is commonly known. People should be reading this to their children at night. You might ask why I think that, and I will tell you. First of all, it is Spider-Man, which makes everything better. Second of all, Mary Jane is all about her independence and not being a damsel in distress. She's a much better role model than the average fairy tale character. Peter too is great as a boy who believes he's meant for something a little bit more than just being your average wood cutter. In the end they learn that it's all about working together and being equals. Also, kudos to C.B Cebulski for distilling several years of the Peter/MJ marital life into one little fable. As great a job as I think J. M. Strazynski has done with that relationship, Cebulski managed to get the same point across in one comic. My one disappointment with this story was that I expected the Big Bad Wolf to turn out to be recognizable as one of the regular Spidey villains. I suppose it could have been Venom, or at least the symbiote, but it just looked like a big, black, shadowy wolf.

Spider-Man Fairy Tales also raised another question with me about the Marvel ratings system. It seemed perfectly suitable for "All Ages," but it was rated "A." I'm further confused by the fact that Illuminati is rated "T+," which I would have thought would be for slightly younger readers than "A." However, the "A" rated Spider-Man Fairy Tales was all perfectly innocent, while the "T+" rated Illuminati had two panels of Dr. Strange in bed with two obviously naked women. This is going to require further investigation.

The Whole Mary Jane Mess

I don't really comment on this sort of thing, but I notice that the brouhaha over Showcase's recently released Mary Jane statue has even gotten a mention by Gary Susman over at EW.com's PopWatch earlier this week, and, from what I've read, Fox.com also. It got me thinking about a lot of things that I have had on my mind for a while. I honestly think this whole thing has gotten a bit out of hand. Yes, I do think it's sexist, but there are worse things out there. Maybe I'm just desensitized to these things from being a lifelong comics fan though. I don't know. It's not something I really feel the need to get into. Plenty of people already have, but I would like to point specifically to this post at The Beat. Of everything I've read, which is far less than is actually out there on the issue, Heidi MacDonald has detailed the issue, and the problem, the best. I just wanted to say that considering how much attention this has gotten in the non-comics community, it would be nice if Marvel and DC really put a bit more thought into how they present themselves.

Both companies claim that they want to appeal more to female readers, and to this end there has been at least some effort made by both companies. DC especially has made strides with the Minx line, appealing to female readers to start reading Supergirl and actually making changes to the title based on complaints by female readers (the costume could use some more work though, I'm just sayin'), and trying to put more female superheroes at the forefront in general. Marvel, not as adept at this apparently, publishes Spider-Man Loves Mary Jane (and that alone should have clued them in to the problem with the Mary Jane statue), is pushing Ms. Marvel, and had that Laurel K. Hamilton vampire series. Oh, and they did a tie-in with a soap opera. I'm not certain how effective any of this has been for them. I just think that they have to realize that as long as the image they present is one of nothing but cheesecake imagery for horny teenage boys, girls are going to look at the big two companies and assume that they don't produce anything that is for them. I'm not talking about girls being offended or thinking that the comics industry is sexist. I'm just saying that girls look at the image that is projected through the covers on the comics, the merchandise they produce, and the major magazines that promote the industry and assume that nothing either Marvel or DC produces is anything that they would be interested in.

I am not saying that all cheesecake has to be done away with. I am also not saying that I want all comics to have unattractive women in them. Believe me, I don't want to see that any more than any man does. I'm just saying to be a little more careful where the cheesecake is used and on what characters. By all means, keep the naked Shanna the She Devil, but maybe keep the overt sexualization out of the mainstream comics. Does Justice League #10 really need that horrible Michael Turner cover to sell? Is it really appropriate to release that statue of Mary Jane when she is a character that not only does Marvel use to target young female readers, but is also the leading lady of such a hugely successful summer blockbuster as Spider-Man III thereby guaranteeing that it is going to get a lot of attention. (And how did it not occur to them that a significant amount of that attention was going to be negative?)

If DC and Marvel really want to widen their readership, I think that part of that has to be changing their public image. It's like the cigarette industry. Back in the days before filters were on all cigarettes, Marlboros were considered a milder cigarette and marketed towards women. Once the industry changed, Marlboro wasn't the milder option anymore. They had to change their image in order to appeal to a new demographic. That's when they came up with the Marlboro Man. Well, the comic book industry is changing. Girls are reading comic books. They're just not reading Marvel and DC. I know that there are comics out there that a lot of women might like. These companies produce Manhunter, Birds of Prey, Spider-Man Loves Mary Jane and Alias. Marvel and DC are capable of producing the product when they actually try. They just really need to work on their image if they want to actually get the girls to buy the product. As long as Wonder Woman, Supergirl, Ms. Marvel, etc. are nestled on the racks between a bunch of images that are obviously going to turn girls away, there's no reason that any girl should venture over from the Manga section to check it out with any reasonable expectation that the content is going to be any different than everything else they see over there. I'm not even talking about anything nearly as drastic as what Marlboro did, because it's not about trying to change your entire demographic. It's simply about nt conciously alienating an entire group of potnetial readers. And wouldn't everyone benefit from that kind of image change? Marvel and DC might sell more comics, and male comics fans might not be so stereotyped.

Also, I would be lying if I didn't admit that, as a personal favorite of mine, I'd prefer not to see Mary Jane Watson treated like that. She may be a supermodel (and that's a rant for a different post), but that doesn't mean she shouldn't be treated like a person. And if you keep looking at her like that, Spidey's totally going to kick your ass, and you really do not want that. He's Back in Black now and he's throwing people out windows. ETA: What am I thinking? Screw Spidey. Mary Jane'll kick your ass. You ever see what she did to the Chameleon?

Anyway, everyone knows that Mary Jane doesn't hand wash Spider-Man's laundry. If anyone's doing Spidey's laundry for him, it would be Aunt May. Now do you really want little old Aunt May to hurt her back by bending over that much? I didn't think so, so let's get a higher table for that bucket. OK?

[Edited because a very good point was made that I didn't even think about. I apologize for that.]