| Posted: 14 April 2006 at 1:27pm | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
Post #700! A spin off of the "Ten ways to tell you're too old for superheroes" thread.
2 or 3 years ago, I have re-read the first clone saga, by Conway and Andru. I remember how I liked that story very well, and the whole clone matter was really exciting for me. The Jackal, Tarantula, a new Gwen Stacy... and poor Peter Parker in the middle! Yeah, Peter Parker, not Spider-Man. Except for the Spider-Man/Green Goblin clashes from ASM #39 to #122, Spider-Man's life never touched seriously Peter's.
There was a superhero life, with supervillains, action and danger, and a normal life, with aunt May, friends, school, job.
That saga caused a strange union about these 2 lives: the villain (from the superhero life) hated the man, not the superhero.
I loved that story, and I still do (I'll re-read it, sooner or later), but growing up I began to think that maybe there is something wrong in this. Should the super and the normal life stay divided?
I remember when Matrix replaced Clark Kent and acted like a kindergarden child, or when Clark was controlled by the Eradicator and began to act like a cold Kryptonian. In these 2 situations, Clark's reputation could be destroied! In the real life, I would have died by shame for all this.
And I could mention the second clone saga, the Norman Osborn saga, "Born again"... I'm talking about stories which I like, but that maybe have something wrong.
When JB and Howard Mackie were working on AMAZING and PETER PARKER, Mr. Parker was at last tormented by REAL problems: no wife, no house, no job anymore. Like in the real life! No clones, no evil tycoons... Only the hard problems which everyone could have someday. That's the best thing someone has done with the character in these last years. After all, Spider-Man is the most popular "superhero with superproblems", isn't he?
|
Topic Closed)
