Legion World Forums LEGION COMPANION Dr. Gym'll's Cultural Rarities The All Spider-Man thread!

I think this was as far as you ever got with Deb and FNSM: And just what IS the PC doing in the baby's room, anyway? Are ya THAT cramped for space in the condo? And don't bother explaining how the laptop got the virus....we know.

It *is* that tight! With the baby having his own room now, we are really pressed for space, even though we’re considering moving the desk / PC to our room. We’re actually repainting the entire condo right now and then moving on to some new jobs (new floors thanks to Pickles ‘tear up the rug’ puppy phase). Our goal is to have it ready to sell by year end and then buy a house! We’re excited but realize it’s a lot of work (plus, this time we’ll be selling *and* buying instead of just buying).

Meanwhile, back to PAD’s FNSM run, which you’ll recall jaded me enough where in a way it bumped PAD out of my mind as a quintessential Spider-Man writer. You correctly pointed out that he was under a lot of editorial pressure focusing him towards certain types of stories he probably didn’t want to do. Some things, however, were pretty annoying nonetheless and entirely PAD, since I know his writing style pretty well.

One of them was Deb Whitman. Now she’s not my favorite character (in fact, probably my single least favorite girlfriend of Peter’s), but I love Spidey’s past and don’t like when characters are written entirely wrong, which she was here. Basically, during this time Peter was revealed as Spider-Man in Civil War. Deb then wrote a tell-all book about her relationship with Peter years earlier. It’s a very ‘in the now’ type story, which PAD loves doing, but it’s totally out of character for Deb. Deb was a bit crazy (and a lot wasn’t her fault since she thought she was crazy because she thought Pete was Spidey and Pete made her think that was a crazy idea), but she was always a good person. She was not the type of person who would do that. The plotline—and PAD’s actual scenes where he wrote Deb—were bad enough for me to take a step back and realize that many of PAD’s detractors, who claim PAD is willing to ignore decades of characterization to shoehorn characters into his “hot topic of the moment” maybe aren’t all that wrong. I never read Richtor and Shatterstar before his current X-Factor, so I have no idea about whether they are gay is against their prior characterization, but I can’t help but feel those who claim that may be correct; and that is because of Evidence A: Deb Whitman.

Also, he totally got Flash Thompson all wrong, which he should have known better. Flash has been written poorly but many writers over the decades, who ignore how he matured (in the freaking 70’s, so c’mon); PAD knows this but wrote him overly jerkish anyway. He basically turned Peter & Flash into opposing high school teachers (gym versus science), as if it was a sitcom on television. I thought it was pretty bad.

But I don’t want to bash PAD entirely—you know full well I love a lot of his work and realize not every writer gets it right every time.

Deb Whitman, like Marcy, come from a brief era in Spider-Man history that is interesting to me because it kind of had Peter off in another direction for awhile (his Grad School phase). Since I never read those stories when they came out, being either not born or 2 years old, by the time I read them, I knew full well Deb’s period as Peter’s girlfriend was brief, so that made it even better—I could be interested in her, but not get disheartened by the fact that she was very wrong for Pete. Still though, I HATE when a character like that is brought back and shoehorned into whatever plotline causes the lead character grief.

"Also, he totally got Flash Thompson all wrong, which he should have known better. Flash has been written poorly but many writers over the decades, who ignore how he matured (in the freaking 70’s, so c’mon); PAD knows this but wrote him overly jerkish anyway. He basically turned Peter & Flash into opposing high school teachers (gym versus science), as if it was a sitcom on television. I thought it was pretty bad."

I get VERY mixed vibes about Flash. He started to mature by the time he left college for the army. (Did that actually make sense? If you're in college, didn't that let you out of the draft?) After, he seemed to mature more, then more still during the Conway-Andru period. But I've heard such HORRIFIC things about stories with him done decades later. And of course, when I read Ditko's run, my feeling is-- "NO WAY is this SCUM ever gonna grow up into anything else." So I see at least 3 completely contradictory depictions of him! Romita's seems okay, UNTIL you go back and re-read Ditko, then you realize... "WTF?????" It's like a soap-opera that recast an actor. Or something.


The high school sitcom scenario sounds scary.


"Deb Whitman, like Marcy, come from a brief era in Spider-Man history that is interesting to me because it kind of had Peter off in another direction for awhile (his Grad School phase). Since I never read those stories when they came out, being either not born or 2 years old, by the time I read them, I knew full well Deb’s period as Peter’s girlfriend was brief, so that made it even better—I could be interested in her, but not get disheartened by the fact that she was very wrong for Pete. Still though, I HATE when a character like that is brought back and shoehorned into whatever plotline causes the lead character grief."

I did read those when they came out (Bill Mantlo SPECTACULAR SPIDER-MAN, wasn't it?). My feeling was always, dull, nervous, not very outgoing... MIGHT have been okay for the original, high school Peter, but not the way he's been since. MIGHT have been okay as a casual friend, but not someone to get "SERIOUS" about. And somehow, it seemed to get "serious". And then, it got DEMENTED. I didn't care for her going off the deep end suspecting things about him, but his LYING all the time and continuing to do so made it worse. (Please keep in mind, I haven't read these since they came out, I'm going on memories from 35 years ago!) The "resolution" seemed a dirty trick, even though it worked out for the best. It didn't make Pete look all that good in my eyes.


What you're describing about a "tell-all" book sounds like it could only have happened if she had a COMPLETE change in personality, or if someone else talked her into it, and she did it under duress, questioning the whole time, "Is this right? Should I be doing this?"


I suppose the problem is, with any corporate-owned characters, they're gonna go on and on and ON, and the longer they go on, the more chance they're gonna go WRONG. And every time something goes "wrong", it's permanently part of the ongoing history, which only makes it worse... unless someone pulls a "Twilight Zone" time-altering type story to change history, and THAT usually just makes things EVEN WORSE! (Gee, anybody know any of those lately?)

Loathe as I am to even appear to defend Slott (let alone the idea of Evil Phil Urich), what exactly makes Roderick Kingsley "the real Hobgoblin"? Bearing in mind that (a) more than half the original appearances of Hobgoblin I were written with the intention of it being Richard Fisk, (b) in no part of the Stern-written appearances was Kingsley even HINTED at being the Hobgoblin - indeed, it was actively contradicted, with Stern's ultimate "solution" involving a never-ever-mentioned identical twin; (c) Hobby I was ultimately revealed to be Ned Leeds and (d) even in the retconned version, most of the appearances are Leeds, what about RODERICK KINGSLEY as a character makes him a great Hobgoblin?

Remember though, that she was written as near-bankruptcy from healthcare costs (I think for her mum), and utterly desperate for cash.

[And that the last time Peter saw her was him convincing her she was literally off-her-rocker as part of a rather selfish plot to convince her that Spider-Man wasn't Peter Parker. Followed, ultimately, by Spider-Man taking his mask off in public to reveal he was... Peter Parker]

Well, what I really mean is "Hobgoblin I", whether it was Kingsley or Ned. I actually enjoyed the Kingsley revelation quite a bit in the Hobgoblin Lives miniseries, though I would have enjoyed Richard Fisk as well if he hadn't been revealed as the Rose.

But essentially, I don't like the idea of the original Hobgoblin dying. Having thought about your post some more, I think I see him as the Hobgoblin first and then whoever he really is second.

Does that make any sense? Even typing this I'm having a hard time saying what I mean.

As for PAD/Deb, I had forgotten that was her motivation. I'm glad she at least had a motive.(Still don't like the usage of character and actual delivery of the plotline but I'm glad there was some backing to it all).

PS - any post where Reboot must relunctantly plays devil's advocate for Dan Slott makes my day.

I keep forgetting... WHY did Roger Stern leave the book when he did, BEFORE revealing Hobgoblin's identity? His leaving just then caused more troubles than I can count.

Sure - you're trying very hard to say "Hobgoblin I is a completely personality-less cypher with no distinctive features not covered better by other characters, but I like him anyway" while trying not to admit to things like "completely personality-less cypher".

This is one occasion where I'm glad you're unable to spell/implement grammar correctly!

Well, in those Stern and DeFalco stories, the Hobgoblin had a very clear personality, and had more characterization than either Kingsley or Fisk (not as much as Ned of course who had a good 15 years of appearances prior).

So in my mind, the original Hobgoblin is a more clearly defined character than Kingsley by a longshot. Richard Fisk has subsequently developed into something else all together.

It's that original Hobgoblin, whose thought bubbles we could read as he first became aware of the Goblin legacy, gradually grew into his role as Spidey's new nemisis and eventually succumbed to madness, that I really want to see.

Those stories gave him a distinct flavor that many super-villains lack and Macendale could never compare to.

The latest restoration, I'm afraid, gets my vote for one of the WORST covers I'm putting up at the site. Not only is the art AND design awful, the dialogue makes the X-Men seem like bad guys...

http://www.samcci.nostromo.no/x-men/MTU%20004.jpg

I love how Scott is still such a square, dressed like he used to in the early 60's.

Review: Amazing Spider-Man #650

So when "Big Time" was launched, I decided this was the point where I'd give Spedey another go. My reservations about the BND era were that the series was published thrice-monthly and that the writers would change arc-to-arc, the latter of which spelled inconsistency to me. I was never all that riled up about the anullment of the marriage, but investing that much money in what was guaranteed to be a mixed bag meant I wasn't gonna risk it.

"Big Time" promised to address those issues with 1) One writer, Dan Slott (whose stuff I enjoyed on Mighty Avengers (sorry, Cobie ), a reduction to a twice-monthly schedule & 3) though $3.99, each issue having extra pages to help justify the expense. Though not on my pull list, I resolved to give it a chance as I truly love the character and have missed getting my fix.

Well, so far, so good! 650 in particular shows the potential that this run under Slott has, having improved on the prior opening stories in 648 & 649. Nothing truly monumental occurs (the new costume on the cover is explained as Peter having it for pure functionality against the current threat he faces in the Hobgoblin), but the book simply reads the way a Spidey comic should! There's a sense of menace to the opponent, but the story moves breezily and there are heaping helpings of humor that make are LOL funny without turning Spidey into a goofy character.

What do I mean about the humor? Well, two things stick out:

1) There's a conversation between Peter, MJ and Carlie in which Dan decides to inject humorous parenthetical substitues in place of more boring explications. For example, Pete says to Carlie, "I've built a harmonic mesh based on Hank Pym's theory of <something MJ wouldn't understand>" And Carlie's reply works in kind and so on. Then MJ gets the last laugh by mentioning something about her work that Pete and Carlie wouldn't recognize.

It's something I wouldn't want to see overused, but I give Slott credit for making a boring expository conversation a real rib-tickler! Plus, who hasn't been a fifth wheel in a conversation between mutual acquaintances where you just kinda check out because you have zero interest or comprehension? Good stuff!

2) There's another scene where Pete has to find an inventive way to hide what he's been up to as Spidey from his new co-workers that's as inventive as it is hilarious! If Slott can be this fresh with humorous situations in this book, I'll be onboard for the duration!

Like Cobie, I'm not a huge fan of Humberto Ramos's exaggerated style. But I have to admit that it works here a lot more often than it doesn't. The facial expressions are mostly spot-on, for one thing. I'm not in love with his new Hobgoblin look, but I have to admit it's less derivative of the classic Green Goblin costume.

The biggest problem I had with his art this issue was the overly sexualized posing with the Black Cat and her scenes. I realize that she's sexy and meant to be so, but I don't think it has to be run to the ground with her contorted unnaturally to give us extra boobage. I dunno, I guess I just like the girl too much to see an artist's overboard attempt to show even more boobage when there's already plenty on display!

Like Cobie, I'd prefer that Slott hadn't killed off Roderick Kingsley. As other posters have pointed out, though, there are flaws in being fans of the Kingsley version when the original was never definitively Kingsley until Sterns Hobgoblin Lives mini. But I would have preferred some follow-up done with him once the mini was put out there. Instead Hobgoblin languished whil Norman Osborne was brought back to the forefront. And when Kingsley finally does get a chance to shine, he's killed off and replaced! Ugh! Anyway, that's my point of view. Like Cobie, I'd prefer that Slott pulled a bait-and-switch at some point, but I'm not optimistic.

In any case, this new Hobgoblin does have some potential. I don't know much about Phil Urich, so I can't opine too much about Slott's choice. I suspect that Slott did this because the old version's history was so convoluted and inconsistent that he felt it was better to start fresh with someone new under the mask. Whether that was the right decision, is up for debate, but I suspect this was Slott's reasoning. So far, my interest is picqued despite some disappointment as a fan of the classic Hobgoblin stories under Stern especially.

Like I said, so far, so good. As someone who loves Spider-Man but has been burned in the past, I'm cautiously optimistic that Spidey may once again have hit the "Big Time"!

Lardy's rating for Amazing Spider-Man #650: 4 Donuts (out of five)!

I'm glad you're reading and enjoying! Despite my vocal annoyance with the Hobgoblin-related plot twists, there has been a lot of good thus far. I'm looking forward to us both checking it out in coming months!

(And my favorite, Marcos Martin, is due for an arc soon on art chores).

Maybe Kingsley ISN'T really dead.


This IS Marvel, after all.


(Norman Osborn, anybody?)

Well, Kingsley's relatively obscure by comparison. (Only fairly hardcore Spidey nerds like us know who he is.) But that hasn't always prevented characters from being brought back in the past. We'll see...

I suspect what happened there was that every other writer realised Stern had pulled a boner . Love him or hate him, Macandale filled a role in Spider-Man's rogues' gallery - he was The Mercenary, the one who fought for himself only to get more power to get more cash.

Kingsley on the other hand... was a poor man's Osborn, a watered-down clone - rich businessman puts on a Goblin suit, but without everything that makes Peter vs. Norman personal.

And Stern made him the Hobgobin again JUST AFTER OSBORN CAME BACK!

[And had him tank to Spider-Man without a fight (what happened to the flesh-melting blaster?). And left everything where Hobgoblin I, to use Cobalt's words, "grew into his role as Spidey's new nemisis and eventually succumbed to madness" as Ned, so there was just a fashion mogul with a hokey twin brother "twist" who hadn't shown up in any role for well over a decade because no writer saw him as worthwhile.]

What chance anyone would bother using Kingsley when they could use Norman, really?

You know, even though I applauded Roger coming back and 'cleaning up' the Hobgoblin Saga by having him as Kingsley, I still kind of always see Hobgoblin as Ned Leeds because that's how I always saw him as a kid when I reread those stories dozens of times. I see him as a very distinct personality that 'trumps' the Kingsley personality.

I can see your point, 'Boot, that by having the Hobgoblin Kingsley, and then having Norman Osborn back, Hobby inadvertantly became a lot more like the Green Goblin than ever before. (I personally think Norman should never have been brought back, or at least kept alive after the Clone Saga, but it is what it is now).

Regardless, he's still my all-time favorite Spider-Man villain. As I mentioned, if someone said "the Hobgoblin actually WAS Ned" or "the Hobgoblin wasn't Kinglsey after all but was ___", it wouldn't make him any less so; in fact, it could help the character for all I know.

Well most of the stories showing him with a distinct personality were left as Ned. Kingsley's pretty bland.

They were never going to keep Norman dead after PP:SM #75, like or loathe his return - it would have made no sense to go to the trouble of overturning his death and then kill him off again straight away. That really WOULD have been cheap (plus, the extended TPB version of PP:SM #75 even shows the Goblin pulling himself from the rubble).

And that alone should have been reason to spike Hobgoblin Lives - which, again, came after PP:SM #75. The Hobgoblin was concieved at a time when Norman was dead as a replacement - with the original back (and seeing some fairly good stories in the post-Clone Saga period, Jenkins' run, Ellis' Thunderbolts [remember his naked dictation?] & even, yes, Dark Reign), who the hell was going to want Norman-lite?

Don't you think there's a problem there, since you're effectively saying the Hobgoblin is weakened by being Kingsley, not strengthened?

PS: Looks like Evil Phil is sticking around. Cheap Slott, cheap.

[Interesting how no-one remembers there was a non-Kingsley HG already running around, incidentally...]

Regarding Norman, even though his being alive in a way really lessens the character in mind as the premiere all-time great Spider-Man nemesis, I did enjoy the Jenkins stories post-Clone Saga quite a bit. And when I read them, I did think "well, this story at least kind of makes him being back worthwhile".

Since I've never really thought about how Hobby can exist in a Norman-living MU that much before, and you've made a lot of good points, I'm beginning to see how Hobby not being Kingsley might be a good thing (on the premise that he wasn't just recently killed which can be overturned in a heartbeat). But I definitely don't want him to be like Macendale, as a strait-up mercenary. He'd have to be different from both Norman & Macendale (which he originally was).

I kind of wish that if Slott had gone with a new Hobgoblin that it would be made into a mystery again. That element really suited the character, even though it really got bollocksed up over time. But I think identity mystery is a big part of any goblin character, or at least the notion that whomever is under the mask is just as important.

One problem with the original is that many of the candidates weren't that compelling or logical or really integral in and of themselves beyond being suspects. Ned Leeds was a fairly major supporting character at the time, but I would put him in a second tier at best behind MJ, JJJ, Robbie, Betty, Flash, etc. But Ned was the only suspect who had something compelling in Pete's life. (Flash was never a serious candidate.) As I recall, Ned and Lance Bannon were always the prime suspects in fandom. Lance always seemed like a bonehead, but having a rival photog as a suspect was an interesting take.

So I don't like that we already know it's Phil. I also think that since Slott was making this apparent from the beginning that a little more background on Phil would've been appropriate. He's a fairly obscure character (as the heroic GG) from the early '90s. I know he was used in Runaways and a spin-off of it and may or may not have gotten some play in the BND era, but I'm pretty sure many readers jumping on would be a little lost. And learning more about why he's off the deep end is a must.

Still, I like the menace and persona of the current Hobgoblin himself so far. I just wish Slott had considered some build-up before revealing who it is.

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


How many times can one series jump the shark, ANYWAY?

I would say Kingsley being killed off is controversial (at least to fans of Stern), but characterizing it as a "jump the shark" moment feels a little too extreme.

Lardy, I'm reading into it that Slott has still left things slightly vague in that he could pull a bait & switch and it would be plausible. Do you get that feeling too, or is that just wishful thinking on my part? In other words, we haven't seen 100% that the new Hobgoblin is Phil though it is obviously heavily implied.

That's how I've read it all along but I'm a jaded old Spider-Man fan who has a tough time believing anything is set in stone anymore. (Though you are also a long-time, likely also jaded, Spidey fan too so... )

How do we KNOW it's really Norman Osborn anyway, and not just some CLONE?????

I haven't read the series since MJ got blown up and "permanently" killed in that airplane explosion, so I'm not sure what level of importance it is either. But to me, these "moments" have been going on since George Stacy got OFFED, and maybe, a few years before that.

I dunno. I just haven't read it that way, but I suppose it's possible circumstantially. It seems if that's what Slott is going for, it's being tremendously downplayed.