| Author |
|
David Kingsley Kingsley
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 18 June 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1098
|
| Posted: 10 February 2008 at 6:26pm | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
Brian, I don't remember that, but if you say so, then I'll take your word for it.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Günther Seydlitz
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 24 June 2005
Location: Germany
Posts: 142
|
| Posted: 14 February 2008 at 3:41am | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
Read the first three issues of Brand New Day yesterday and it
was great fun.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
***Erik Larsen
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 11 February 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 49
|
| Posted: 14 February 2008 at 1:44pm | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
John Byrne wrote:
How about Erik Larsens "background man"?
••
That was corrected and apologized for years ago. The background man
actually worked for Valentino.
Ah, but it's only the BAD news that makes for the good stories, isn't it?
HEY, ERIK LARSEN! SEEMS I GOT CONFUSED AND MIXED UP YOUR BOOK
WITH VALENTINO'S! SORRY ABOUT THAT! ALSO SORRY FOR SHOUTING
AND REPEATING MYSELF, BUT APPARENTLY SOME PEOPLE ARE A BIT DEAF
AROUND HERE. |
|
|
This is the first I've heard of any apology.
Granted--I can't be everywhere but you didn't call and you didn't write
and I don't remember seeing such a thing in the thread where I was
accused of having had an uncredited background artist.
Where and when did this appear? Can anybody provide a link? I'd be
curious to see it.
And for the record--Jim Valentino gave his background artist credit.
Which is not to say no artist has even used an uncredited background
artist--plenty have--but Jim was not one of them.
And I apologize if this is embarrassing or awkward. I didn't sign up here
to cause trouble--but I am curious as to whether this apology is real or
ret con.
I've read one too many Spider-Man comics.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
***Erik Larsen
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 11 February 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 49
|
| Posted: 15 February 2008 at 11:50am | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
I think--had JB actually done the Shaper of Worlds story--that readers
would also get pretty bent out of shape. It's still "cheating" after all. And
besides--as we've seen in the past--the Shaper's changes are illusions
maintained by him. In several stories, the Shaper was distracted or hurt
and they reverted to what they had been. This would make the world a
quasi-dream world that depended on the Shaper remaining conscious in
order for it to be maintained--and then there's the ever-present: well, if
THAT can happen--why couldn't he step in at any other point and undo
anything else? Elektra's dead? You just gotta dream hard, Matt and here
comes the Shaper to cure all the world's ills.
Honestly--I think the best solution would have been a divorce. They
could get a quick easy divorce and in the comics they could use only
ambiguous language when talking about their past relationship. MJ could
be Peter's "ex" (which could be construed to mean "ex-wife" or "ex-
girlfriend"). It makes him that much more of a loser and the end result is
the same.
I wrote a whole long column about it:
http://www.comicbookresources.com/columns/index.cgi?
column=ofo&article=2972
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Vinny Valenti
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 8317
|
| Posted: 15 February 2008 at 11:56am | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
I would have been against a Shaper-of-Worlds solution as well, because that would entail a partial reboot of the Marvel Universe, or a "false reality" for the reasons you mention above. I consider this BND to be a false reality as well, though - since we are reading the adventures of a Peter Parker that technically is still married, but he's just carrying on like a single guy because he forgot that he's still married.
I agree that a divorce would have just been the simplest thing to do.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 134949
|
| Posted: 15 February 2008 at 11:57am | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
Debating stories that didn't happen is rather pointless, isn't it?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
joe glasgow
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 23 February 2007
Posts: 176
|
| Posted: 15 February 2008 at 12:19pm | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
Divorce would have been the answer to the marriage thing, I agree. What would then be done about the unmasking, feeding spike things and all of the other balls ups written into Peter Parkers life? It seems that they painted themselves into a corner and could not be arsed to think of a way out. One More Day was not a good solution but then just accept it as one of the things written out of continuity. A good example of disapearing up your own arse.
Edited by joe glasgow on 15 February 2008 at 12:21pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Jeff W Williams
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 06 August 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 299
|
| Posted: 15 February 2008 at 12:22pm | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
A divorced Spider-Man is an old Peter Parker. Unmasking was pretty much a point of no return as well. I'm not sure how you could get rid of the marriage and the identity exposure in a way that would satisfy, really. The rest of the stuff they could have just never mentioned again and it would have been forgotten over time. Even the spike things.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Stéphane Garrelie
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 05 August 2005
Location: France
Posts: 4266
|
| Posted: 15 February 2008 at 12:27pm | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
The marriage was ok, excepted for one thing= Writers don't like married Spider-Man. Even those like Michelinie or Roger Stern (Hobgoblin Lives) who wrote the marriage well don't like it.
The problem of the secret identity is something else totaly. Joe Q made it worse, but the problem existed since at least the early 90s of too many people knowing who Spider-Man really was.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Todd Douglas
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 14 July 2004
Posts: 4101
|
| Posted: 15 February 2008 at 12:29pm | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
QUOTE:
| Divorce would have been the answer to the marriage thing, I agree. What would then be done about the unmasking |
|
|
Simple..."reveal" that Peter Parker did him a favor and "unmasked" as Spider-Man. Happened before, no reason it couldn't again.
They atrophy and just stop working.
QUOTE:
| and all of the other balls ups written into Peter Parkers life? |
|
|
I'd wager everything that they wanted to get rid of could just as easily have been discarded all without Peter & MJ making a deal with the devil.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
joe glasgow
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 23 February 2007
Posts: 176
|
| Posted: 15 February 2008 at 12:34pm | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
Quote:
| Divorce would have been the answer to the marriage thing, I agree. What would then be done about the unmasking |
|
Simple..."reveal" that Peter Parker did him a favor and "unmasked" as Spider-Man. Happened before, no reason it couldn't again.
They had an unmasked Peter Parker beat the crap out of the Kingpin in front of a prison riot. They played for keeps with some of the plot developments in the unmasking.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Stéphane Garrelie
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 05 August 2005
Location: France
Posts: 4266
|
| Posted: 15 February 2008 at 12:34pm | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
QUOTE:
| Simple..."reveal" that Peter Parker did him a favor and "unmasked" as Spider-Man. Happened before, no reason it couldn't again. |
|
|
Peter used his powers, like the organic web, in public in front of reporters, being in civilian clothes. An explanation for that (Mysterio... or something like that) would be necessary too.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Topic Closed)
