JUST ONE MORE SPIDEY BLOG!
That way, we will have 8 blogs to coincide with the message of CHANGE! =P

Posted by Aziroth on 2008-10-21 10:04:57
change
accept change. i trust the folks at marvel. if the character didn't change, it would be stale and have way too much continuity to deal with, for lack of a better phrasing.

Posted by bogmonster on 2008-10-21 10:28:17
Hmm....
I hope whomever flagged my post realized I was just joking...

Anyways, thanks for investing much of your time to answer our questions Brevoort.

Posted by Aziroth on 2008-10-21 10:55:02
thanks Mr.Brevoort
For answering my questions. As for the "616" thing I just got used to it as a mostly universally understood way to convay what I ment. Did it mean for it too be annoying. Thank you.

Posted by s-i-d-e-r-m-a-n on 2008-10-21 11:31:49
Didn't mean that is. Their should be an edit post in thesaer things.

Posted by s-i-d-e-r-m-a-n on 2008-10-21 11:33:29
Gwen and MJ Tarnished
Too late to ask but, will Gwen's character assassination (Sins Past) ever be rectified and/or does Marvel really give a rip overall? Does the fan base care overall from your perspective? I was never a fan of MJ during hers and Peter's first go-around after Gwen's death. But the character established from the time of her return until OMD seems to also have been tarnished, this time by the events of BND (secret movie star hook-ups). Any comments on the defamation of their characters and any plans to restore them?

Posted by mattbonham on 2008-10-21 11:41:05
Thanks
Hey Tom,
Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions and also for being so frank.

That said, I'm really looking forward to seeing you
>respond to a couple of points from the response threats<

Definitely the best Freudian slip ever! (Just kidding)

Seriously though, it's really good of you to take the time to do this. I'm anti-BND and even I'm tired of every second comment referencing it, so I can only imagine how you feel.

As a next series of threads, you could consider asking the fans what Marvel needs to do to improve. I'm thinking more along the lines of "Make the Comics on Sale area of the website more like DC's version where you can immediately see previous and future issue of a given title," style suggestions rather than commentaries on individual titles.

Anyway.
I Believoort!

Posted by cjmcaree on 2008-10-21 12:55:07
Loki...
I know in JMS's run Pete helped out Loki and in return the trickster gave him a rune to use to call Loki for help when and if Spidey ever needed it. My guess what that how Pete was going to help Aunt May, but I was wrong.

Not that I want to know them, but are there any plans for that particular plot point or is it just hanging out there now for another writer to pick up on? Thanks!

Posted by pmpknface on 2008-10-21 13:05:44
Tom, I just finished watching The Incredible Hulk blu-ray. Again, wow! I know you guys don't really have too much to do with the movie stuff, but seriously from every fan, thank you Marvel.

Posted by thomas more on 2008-10-21 14:45:14
I was going to apologize for the accidental double post, but ya know what, I think that movie was so cool that it deserves an accidental double post!

Just thought of a quick question or two (or more) for you T that are non-Spidey related,

1) What are your personal top five or top ten favorite TPB's.
2) Did you see, and if you did, did you enjoy, the movie 300?
3) Have you seen the majority, if not all, of the Marvel comic book movies that have been made since 2000's X-Men? Which was your favorite?
4) Do you get to see Marvel movies for free at the theatre/premieres (if you go)?
5) Do you eagerly await the trailers for the new Marvel movies like the rest of us, or do you get to view them early?
6) What non-Marvel comic book movie are you most looking forward to? I'm guessing you're looking forward to ALL of the upcoming Marvel movies.
7) Have you ever talked with Stan Lee?
8) What was your biggest fanboy moment that you've ever had with someone, where you were the jaw-dropped fan?

Well, if you ever answer any of those T, it'd be cool to hear.

Posted by thomas more on 2008-10-21 15:32:07
Reader greed regarding Spiderman
One interesting aspect of revisions is reader greed. We want the current "our" version of a character to be the "real" version. We want to be assured that all of the stories we read still count and still really happened. The problem is that Spiderman is a timeless character. If we cling to the last 20 years, we are denying future readers of the pleasure of reading about a young, single Spiderman. We want Spiderman to grow up with us. We want Spiderman to mirror and allude to experiences that we are currently going through, not the experiences we dealt with 20 years ago. Well that's just tough. He's not ours. We don't get to keep him. He is timeless, while we, unfortunaltely, are not. One other thought: What if previous generations had gone through such lengths to keep "their" characters "the right way"? I imagine it was bittersweet for for the WWII generation to see Cap go from fighting Nazis in Germany to fighting aliens in New York. They were selfless enough to understand that the pleasure is the thing, not whether it "counted in continuity" or "still really happened". They understood that the pleasure reading Captain America gave them "really happened", and that's the point. I hope we understand that, as well.

Posted by daniel7023 on 2008-10-21 17:34:48
Second Try
I have been a Ben Reilly fans for years. The Clone Saga is something that I have read in the last few years (well, issues I can get my hands on that is, I was 10 when it was originally released). I am excited about the upcoming Ben Reilly story in the X-Men/Spider-Man mini-series.

So, I was wondering if there are any more Ben Reilly stories in the works?? Would they most likely be "untold tales" (if there are more stories to be told)?

On another point, why is there an omnibus of the Clone Saga in French and not an English version? I have seen it on Amazon (a simple Google search helped) and was wondering why the French speaking world gets one, and not the English (or any other language) speaking world does not...

Posted by Nova#1 on 2008-10-21 20:38:59
There you go again...
"I’m sorry to be so negative about this, since fan activity can actually accomplish many things, but I just don’t think this is one of them. At this point, the hard work is done, the band-aid has been pulled off, and you’d have to be a particular kind of stupid to go back to a status quo that people have spent twenty years trying to UNDO...

...I actually think Fan Activism works best and stands the best chance of success when it’s trying to BUILD something rather than DESTROY something, because it’s easier to get people on board."

Last I heard, Anti-OMD/BND fans want to SAVE/RESTORE the marriage, NOT DESTROY it.

With your conflicting statements (again, ), I honestly don't know if you're acknowledging the influence of fan activism or ridiculing it...

Posted by rrargh on 2008-10-21 21:01:30
Miscellaneous responses from an obvious anti-OMD former reader:

YOU WROTE:
...I’m not sure that there is anything more you can do to affect change other than not buying the book—and I’m not sure any great good is served by trying, other than a lot of wasted effort. At the end of the day, the series is going to remain the way it is until and unless the sales cause us to re-evaluate what we’re doing on it—and as I mentioned in an earlier response, even then, the changes we’re likely to make aren’t those that would result in reversing OMD....At this point, the hard work is done, the band-aid has been pulled off, and you’d have to be a particular kind of stupid to go back to a status quo that people have spent twenty years trying to undo. It’s not impossible, of course, but I think it would require such a change-over in staff as to be incredibly unlikely.

MY RESPONSES:
1. "Unless sales cause us to reevaluate" contradicts the notion that "...(no) good is served by trying." Lack of sales reversed New Coke and helped to undo the replacement of Peter Parker with Ben Reilly. Long-term, vociferous protest is sometimes necessary to reverse something that was wrong from the get-go. And since a portion of the people refusing to buy ASM are also not buying multiple Marvel titles that once were on their monthly pull-lists, continued refusal to buy Marvel's product is, as you note, a legitimate form of protest that could, conceivably, compel change.
2. With all due respect, twenty years is a huge exaggeration. If I had verbal fights with my wife in 1988, in 1993, in 1998, and in 2007, this doesn't mean I've had twenty years of non-stop battles. There were many more years where the marriage was accepted and was unaccosted, though sometimes it was underutilized and sometimes it was welcomed.
3. The married status quo did not need to be reversed, except, mostly, in the minds of some powers at Marvel...the erasure of the marriage, however, DOES need to be reversed in order to bring back tens of thousands of fans that Marvel has willingly estranged from Spider-Man and/or the company as a whole. When the marriage was truly embraced, as JMS did with much success, it INCREASED sales. When the marriage was erased, it DECREASED sales. Marvel should spend its time listening to the larger part of their customer base rather than attempting to restore a status quo that their character long since outgrew and did not need in order to attract new fans (note how the sales figures climbed over the recent years while he was married, and how many readers began to read in the past 20 years).
4. You may believe that the band-aid has been pulled off, Mr. Brevoort, but the gaping wound that was underneath is still hemorrhaging blood due to the unnecessary surgery that was performed on it. It needs to be restored to its original (pre-OMD) condition.
5. A particular kind of poor judgment (I don't wish to use the "stupid" word that you used) entails insisting on staying with a bad choice when it is hurting sales (as we know it is doing, despite the masking of that problem with the 3-times-per-month publication schedule and the first-year subscription bribery). I do not think it is entirely off-base to note that the industry as a whole began losing sales simultaneously with OMD's erasure of the timeline and married continuity in which so many fans were invested...while economic and other factors surely play a part, there were multiple people online who expected the industry as a whole to lose a percentage of its readership if Marvel alienated fans with the OMD retcon. It is a mark of wisdom and non-vanity to say "I was wrong" and to undo a mistake (and possibly restore readers to the industry) rather than to proclaim "stay the course"...although, as you noted, it appears that the ones in power at Marvel do not have the ability or inclination to step back enough to prioritize the larger customer base over their own perspectives.
6. Final comment on the above...Every time you portray Peter Parker having a date, it will push some on-the-fence fans out the door. Every time there's a story which could have been told with a married Peter Parker, people will be ticked off that you took something they appreciated (Peter's evolved married life) and turned it into sewage. Mary Jane Watson-PARKER has never been an albatross around Peter Parker's neck, nor did she limit story options in any meaningful manner except with regard to Peter's ability to date other women. The man can be married and have many arcs in which his wife does not appear, just as he can have an Aunt May without the aunt appearing or a job without the workplace appearing or a supporting cast that was neglected suddenly start reappearing. And if you're concerned about him having a kid and aging further, make MJ unable to have children. They go through a sad, emotional arc, then reaffirm their committment, and they can then continue to grow and develop as fictional people while you never have to worry about publishing a story in the mainstream Marvel universe in which Peter Parker is a 40-something father who is ostensibly "too old" for others to relate to. The elements you felt were lacking in ASM...some which were specifically deprived from the book in order to sell BND as a back-to-basics contrast...can clearly remain even if Peter Parker's marriage is restored. In short, there is much to gain and little to lose by reversing OMD.

And, on two final notes:

YOU WROTE:
I actually think Fan Activism works best and stands the best chance of success when it’s trying to build something rather than destroy something, because it’s easier to get people on board. If I’m a Spidey reader who’s bought AMAZING through think and thin for however many years, you’re going to have an incredibly hard time getting me to stop, even for a single issue.

MY RESPONSES:
1. I had been reading ASM for 34 years and OMD made it necessary for me to stop. My under-10-years-old son chose to stop also, appalled (not his word, obviously) that anyone would view a married Spider-man as a problem. The Internet and comic book stores throughout the country are littered with people of all ages who have read ASM for anywhere from a few years to multiple decades who have stopped reading as a result of OMD and the post-OMD universe and a sense that nothing in the ASM universe matters to them anymore. You have effectively estranged HUGE throngs of fans, and not just for a single issue. For some, OMD made leaving easy...for others, you're correct, it was quite hard for them to stop but they did so anyway...and, you are also correct, I've met many others online who continue to read because it is too difficult to stop...and yet, even there, many of them have states that they wish for the married continuity to be restored, as that's the one they prefer, and they keep on offering up the apparently-futile (according to you) belief that this is all some scheme to show how Peter and MJ's love as a married couple can transcend even Mephisto's demonic influence and be restored to its pre-OMD status. And, regarding those many who have left, just because they no longer read the book, it does not mean that their opinions should not matter deeply to you as a custodian of Spider-man and as a caretaker of a business that depends at least in part on good, not bad, word-of-mouth. Most of the people currently reading...not all, granted, but most...would continue to read if you restored the original timeline with the marriage intact...they were doing so before OMD and continued afterward, suggesting both realities are fine by them...while MANY of the people who cannot stomach reading under the new reality would return. That would be BUILDING the fanbase again, not destroying it, as OMD effectively did.
2. Fan activism with regard to OMD's needed reversal is absolutely NOT aimed at destroying something. We're trying to save a character we've deeply loved and followed for ages...a character who is published by a company that we trusted would honor continuity and our long-term readership and that would care more about the larger fan sentiment (whose opposition to OMD was clearly expressed way before OMD hit the fan) than they did their own mental images of who Spider-man should have remained before he took on a fictional life of his own that grew beyond the original boundaries and became more rich and interesting. We are trying to SAVE Spider-man from what we perceive as misguided forces that have destroyed something precious. We are fighting for the RESTORATION of what Marvel has ignominiously destroyed. Analogy: Aunt May's house was destroyed. If some illegal squatter started building his own home on the rubble of what was demolished, Aunt May would go to City Hall and would fight for what was rightfully hers (while probably offering him some baked goods). Nobody would accuse her of trying to destroy the scammer's home, even if the restoration of her rights would require stopping this new replacement structure from being improperly constructed where it doesn't belong. She'd be fighting to REBUILD and RESTORE what was unfairly taken from her. The many, many irate, alienated fans are doing no less.

Posted by jeffgamer on 2008-10-21 23:00:20
a. My comments above are strong in opinion, but they do not bash anyone in or out of Marvel. I would hope that, recognizing that, nobody abuses the "flag" feature.

b. Having said all the above, yes, I do want to thank Mr. Brevoort for giving us a forum to communicate our outrage and passionate sentiments directly to him. While I'm aware that some Marvel creators do frequent the various message boards (often in "lurker" mode, occasionally in "poster" mode), the opportunity to be certain that I have been heard by those with the power to maybe, just MAYBE, make a difference and reverse this, is appreciated.

Posted by jeffgamer on 2008-10-21 23:09:19
Trades + Hardcovers you want to see !?
MARVEL:

HC of Mike Golden's The Nam (#1-13)
Mighty Avengers Oversized HC
Thor Oversized HC

Posted by underworldeve on 2008-10-22 03:14:37
Super-spy parents
Have to agree with Tom on that score. I never understood that element of the mythos, it always seemed a bit outof left field to me. Would be happy to see that done away with as part of BND!

Posted by Moorish on 2008-10-22 05:19:52
To conclude about you know what and you know
I could discuss endlessly about Ted Mc Keever, about the powerful style of early works like 'Eddy Current' and 'Plastic Forks'.
'Metropol' , and the early DC works as 'The extremist ' and 'Doom Patrol' are great also, but I don't know if it could feet for 'SpiderMan', because his style had becoming more and more closed upon himself, and the pages haven't some respirations that he used to let.
But I'm not the artist, and I didn't dare give him ( this guy especially, because he is the artist that a generation or two of art-school stzdents dreamed ,and still dream to be ) lessons.
No one will portraited urban landscapes like him, neither the every-day life. So if readers appreciated the mini 'Reign', then it made me think that they won't be so surprised, soMc Keever is the one for an Amazing as you never had seen before.
Especially since the title has taken an esoteric side.
Anyway YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED TO DON'T HAVE THE CONTACT OF HIM AND ANN NOCENTI ANYMORE...
do I have REALLY to suggest you CBR or Newsrama ?

AND
I think Pete's parents agents of S.H.I.E.L.D is a WONDERFUL idea, because I hadn't read this story, thinking that the James Bond aspect is the one to not fall in, this is not the worst influence neither, I'm thinking of Flemming's books...


Did I told you something about Ann Nocenti...?

Posted by notapotatoe on 2008-10-22 09:11:34
Thanks Again Tom
This exercise is akin to catching your kid smoking and then locking him in the closet to finish a carton of cigarettes as punishment. I do think a lot of worthwhile points came from the Q&A though and more than anything appreciate the forum you provide. If you have it in you, I do think it would be worthwhile to have some sort of summation reflecting on all that went down. At the very least I hope that this will quiet the occasional bleating dissenter who will vent Spidey no matter what the topic, at the very best I hope that there is a modicum of understanding reached between yourself and the fans outside of the talking points on this divisive fictional topic. For me, the deal is done and that's fine. Creators did what they thought was necessary to get there. Now, please leave it wayyyyy behind. No more mysteries, no mention of lost time. The Brain Trust only needs to tell stories with a character as noble and human as we remember him to be and hopefully with some sense that it was all worth it in the end. Cheers!

Posted by hamgravy on 2008-10-22 15:05:34
Ben Reilly
Nova#1, you might want to keep an eye on X-Men/Spider-Man.

Posted by Michael Heide on 2008-10-22 17:45:37
Agree entirely with hamgravy
It's done now, let's move on. Jeffgamer, while I admire your passionate defence of the marriage, I think we have to accept it's gone. It was a limiting influence on the character, who (as much as we individually would like it) shouldn't grow up or age with us. He needs to represent the youthful figure he always has done, for the generations of readers that follow us. I think Joe Q is right, it will take 4 or 5 years for the furore over this to fully go away, but eventually people will just get over it. I personally hated OMD as a story, but it was something of a necessary evil. And I really don't think Marvel will go back on it now, no matter how vociferously some fans (in dwindling numbers - the outcry has shrunk as BND has gone on, not intensified) complain.

Posted by Moorish on 2008-10-23 09:27:29
Exactly.

Posted by Michael Heide on 2008-10-23 10:27:59
* A married Spider-man does not equal an old Spider-man. A married guy in his 20's is not old. And throngs of younger readers have joined in in the last 20 years, while he's been married. The generations of readers that follow us were not at all deterred by his marital status. It was most certainly NOT a limiting influence on the character.
* Nobody said anything about aging him in real-time. In fact, I specifically made notes against that in my post.
* There are still a lot of ticked off posters online and former/current readers off-line. The reason why you think the furur has died down is because many of the people who vented their ire have left in disgust, leaving a non-representative and disproportionate number of people who accept or tolerate the BS changes behind. You may see fewer comments, but the furor hasn't died down.
* I just came from the musical "1776" (it's also available on video). John Adams fights passionately for independence from Great Britain. At times, he's the only vociferous voice. Some disagree...many agree but aren't willing to voice it. The lesson is simple: you don't accept what is wrong or offensive simply because those who have their hands on the reins of power tell you it is hopeless. This is wrong. Those who are currently in control in the publishing wing of Marvel have abused the power and trust imbued to them by virtue of their positions. Having Peter Parker's marriage get wiped from the timeline is an abominable choice that betrays the characters, the sanctity of Marvel's previously-respectable timeline, and the committment the readers had toward Marvel and Spider-Man for many years. So, no...I don't think it silence is the appropriate response. It's not appropriate when we disagree with our political leaders, nor is it appropriate when the captains of a ship for which we care steer it astray and seem unable to see that..

Posted by jeffgamer on 2008-10-23 13:01:04
.
Did you just compare John Adams voicing his dissent against Britain to yourself and OMD/BND? See this is why current readers are getting annoyed at you guys; melodramaaaa.

I've seen post equating Joe Q with Hitler and Spider-Man and BND protesters as Jews. I've seen Joe compared to Stalin, Saddam, George Bush, Mephisto (which is offensive when considering their line of reasoning that Mephisto=Satan). It's either an overblown importance of a fictional character or worse, a trivialization of REAL injustices.
Stop it, you're making fools of yourselves.

Posted by doncorswhazie on 2008-10-23 14:35:28
D'oh! I keep on forgetting to post "analogy" before such examples...too many people mistake analogies for direct comparisons. Nobody thinks that Mr. Quesada is similar to Stalin, Saddam, George Bush, Hitler, or Mephisto, doncorswhazie. Nobody thinks that the editorial destruction of the Spider-Man timeline or marriage is like the destruction of a town, the murder of people, nuclear holocaust, or the dissolution of ties to a mother country. OMD is a bad thing done to a fictional character and his universe, and it is a speck of dust next to any serious crisis in the real world. An analogy helps to highlight some underlying insight without in any way equating one to the other, and I saw an analogical element when watching that musical. There's an underlying point, that silence in the face of something we believe is wrong is not appropriate, nor is acceptance of a status quo that needs to be jettisoned...whether it is with the comparatively insignificant dissolution of elements of a fictional world or the hugely more meaningful situations that occur in the real world. I suspect you've been a part of these discussions about analogies before, doncorswhazie, and while I acknowledge that I failed to follow my recently-self-imposed policy of placing disclaimers with analogies, I also need to point out that when someone overbloats an analogy and claims the person made a direct comparison, it also doesn't look good for the person who did not understand the nature of said analogy.

So, no...OMD/BND is not even in the same ballpark as the American Revolution, and I did not make a claim that it was...I simply drew a parallel underlying lesson from one and applied it to the other, as analogies tend to do. However, as a comic book event, OMD/BND is the worst thing I've ever seen done to a comic book character. And I've seen some pretty bad stuff.

Posted by jeffgamer on 2008-10-23 17:12:13
jeffgamer,
* A married Spider-Man is an old Spider-Man. Here's why: Chances are, your parents are married. To a young reader, parents are always old (even if they're 20 somethings). And if you don't think that's true, then you're old. :)

*There are still a lot of ticked off posters and former readers off-line?! Wow. Newsflash: no matter WHAT changes happen in a comic, there will ALWAYS be ticked off posters and former readers off-line. It'd just be about different stuff.
If they changed things back (which Mr. Brevoort has made VERY clear here that they are NOT going to do under ANY circumstances during this regime-- a regime that is VERY successful and just took over 50% of the market last month-- so they're not going ANYWHERE-- so you might as well give up and find some new cause), but if they DID change things back, there would be ticked off and former readers off-line about that too.

*You are not John Adams. Marvel is not the British Empire. You are a disproportionally vocal comic fan worried about a fringe issue. And Marvel is the #1 comic book company in America, which means that they're putting out comics that most American comic book fans want. :)



Posted by harveytherabbit on 2008-10-23 17:29:22
Spidey: Married = Old?
Honestly, I still don't see why that is the readers' problem, nor why we should be worried that by aging Spidey we're putting nails in his coffin. I'm reiterating my response to Michael Heide a few days ago.

Fifty or even a hundred years from now (assuming I live that long), I don't expect to read stories about Grandpa Spidey. I'm not at all worried that there will inevitably be no other stories about Spidey to read than those of him misplacing his dentures. In my honest opinion, THAT'S THE WRITER'S PROBLEM. OR IN THE CASE OF A GOOD WRITER, THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM AT ALL! THEREIN LIES THE CHALLENGE of how a good writer can still tell progressive stories WITHOUT resorting to deus ex machina.

That goes for cuss words, too. Seeing @&%$ on the page just reads, "Insert favorite expletive here." Even the moderators here tell us that if we can find a way to censor foul language, we can find a way to write without it.

Get it? You don't have to worry about running out of stories of thirty-something Spidey (marriage or no, dead aunt or no) if you're confident that the character is in the hands of a GOOD WRITER.

Just because you have a fatalistic attitude toward aging doesn't mean the writer should. I daresay A GOOD WRITER RISES ABOVE THE NORM TO FIND INSPIRATION FOR GOOD STORIES.

If you're so worried that Spidey would age with marriage, and that only a handful of stories can be told with a married Spidey, I'm sorry, but how many stories have you written lately, and how well-received were those? A GOOD WRITER RISES UP TO THAT CHALLENGE.

Posted by rrargh on 2008-10-23 20:20:12
Are YOU that writer? If so, please stand up! I've been waiting for that kind of writer to write The Amazing Spider-Man ever since OMD/BND showed me that that kind of writer wasn't in ASM anymore.

Posted by rrargh on 2008-10-23 20:27:27
doncorswhazie,
I'd flag your post if the option wasn't disabled. It had NOTHING to do with rebutting jeffgamer's arguments and EVERYTHING to do with assaulting his character, AND those in agreement with him.

At least the post after yours, while dismissive, addressed jeffgamer's points.

Yours, however...

"See this is why current readers are getting annoyed at you guys; MELODRAMAAAA."

"Stop it, you're making fools of yourselves."

How are those even arguments? Or have you run out of good arguments already?

Posted by rrargh on 2008-10-23 20:59:13
I'd also agree with hamgravy, except...
I'd expect the rest of the Marvel U to return to the days of their youth, as should be consistent with Marvel's "long-term vision" regarding character longevity.

Nova back with the New Warriors, anyone?

Didn't think so.

Posted by rrargh on 2008-10-23 21:03:53
.
Oh it's an ANALOGY and not a COMPARISON.
a⋅nal⋅o⋅gy
   /əˈnælədʒi/
–noun, plural -gies.
a similarity between like features of two things, on which a comparison may be based

Thank God for semantics to make overblown comparisons - sorry, analogies - okay.
But yes, when people make ANALOGIES between Hitler and Joe Q they are making fools of themselves.

Posted by doncorswhazie on 2008-10-24 00:34:27
Nope, sorry.
Still an attack.

Play nice, now.

Posted by rrargh on 2008-10-24 01:23:27
Care to justify why you're stating your opinion as truth, while consequently making derogatory comments about people you don't even know personally?

Posted by rrargh on 2008-10-24 01:58:59
Harveytherabbit - 100% correct
Well put, sir.

Posted by Moorish on 2008-10-24 10:27:20
rrargh wrote:
"Get it? You don't have to worry about running out of stories of thirty-something Spidey (marriage or no, dead aunt or no) if you're confident that the character is in the hands of a GOOD WRITER."

***

That's right. But the same is true for a twenty-something, non-aging single Spidey. Which doesn't prove anything.

Posted by Michael Heide on 2008-10-27 08:06:49