Spider-Man Reviews

Showing posts with label mephisto. Show all posts

Venom #13.3 Review

Posted by Adam Zenobi 27 February 2012

The heroes face off with Mephisto!

The Story

In Hell, the four heroes each experience what they desire most: Ghost Rider returns to Mexico with her family, Flash's symbiote permenantly bonds with him (with him in control) and he becomes the new Spider-Man, Red Hulk is recognized as a hero and given his own team of Hulks to lead, and X-23 kills Blackheart and destroys the rest of her clones with Wolverine.

However, each fantasy ends tragically, and the four heroes are then confronted by Mephisto. Mephisto explains that he does not want his son ruling Hell on Earth, and since no one can technically "die" in Hell, he is able to send the souls of the heroes back to Earth. He says that he'll do this in exchange for a favour that he will decide upon later. Everyone accepts the deal.

Thoughts

Warning: if you're one of those people who's still hysterical over Peter Parker making a deal with Mephisto in One More Day, seeing four heroes do it might make your head explode.*

Not much happens this issue; though the deal the heroes make at the end certainly suggests that we'll be getting a Circle of Four sequel in the future. While it's been fun watching these four unlikely heroes team up for the first time, will it really be as fun the second time when the novelty has worn off? I guess we'll have to wait and see. Julian Tedesco does a great job handling the art duties this issue; his Mephisto is badass.

*Relax, I'm kidding. Please don't explain to me why this is "different."

The Infinite Spider-Man Part 5.4: Time Travel

Posted by Mister Mets 27 October 2011

There have been some arguments regarding the rules of time travel within the Marvel Universe, and whether One More Day violated those principles. In some stories it had been suggested that any instance of time travel creates a parallel universe.

But in the Fantastic Four, Reed Richards explained that the Universe sometimes corrects itself. If it's not Marvel's official explanation, it should sufficiently muddy the waters so that a reader is unable to definitively state that time manipulation doesn't work the way it was presented in OMD.

In a post at CBR, Dan Slott elaborates regarding the "rules" of time travel in Marvel Comics.

Correct.
There is no ONE official position for time travel.

Though some characters HAVE stated certain rules, we have seen time and again in comics from the FIRST Marvel time travel stories in the 60's up to present day where they do NOT adhere fast to ANY one rule.

The rules of Marvel time travel have even been broken IN stories where those rules have been clearly stated-- when you bother to take the time to work out those stories' own internal logic.

In response to the suggestion that time travel in fiction needs more explanations than OMD/ OMIT provided, he countered...

I'm sorry that something as wondrous as magic can't be a component of time travel in your view of fiction-- despite the number of times it HAS been used in the Marvel Universe... and going all the way back to one of the greatest time travel stories of all time, Charles Dickens' A CHRISTMAS CAROL where ghosts were the instruments of moving through time.

The Marvel Universe is a tapestry woven by many hands. Different writers will find comfort in some pre-established rules, others will find interesting wrinkles in other pre-established rules, and still others will want to travel down different paths and establish rules of their own.

Some argue that Marvel's trying to have it both ways, trying to suggest that the marriage was significant enough to limit the writers, but not significant enough to have actually affected previous stories. in a substantial way. This goes back to Quesada's point that for the most part, any story you could do with a married Spider-Man could be told just as easily with an unmarried Spider-Man, while the same is not true of any story you could do with an unmarried Spider-Man. So, the absence of the marriage made a difference in OMIT in a way that it would not have made a difference in any preceding story. And the rules presented in OMD also helped.

Since Mephisto explicitly said that he was manipulating things to remove the marriage while keeping almost everything else intact, there's an official explanation for why the changes were so minimal. This doesn't confirm that the marriage was unimportant, suggesting that it was difficult for Mephisto to change the universe to fit the requirements of the deal.

The "For want of a nail" proverb is often mentioned in any arguments about this, but it suggests a misunderstanding regarding causality. While an individual nail has the potential to make a difference, it doesn't always happen. Thanks to What If?, readers have been conditioned to think otherwise.

There are some semantics questions about whether time travel actually occurred in OMD/ OMIT, or whether it was something else entirely, such as a delivery from an alternate world. There were some suggestions that whatever was sent back in time would no longer exist once that timeline was altered, although sci-fi stories have conditioned us to discount that particular paradox. In the Marvel Universe, we've had storylines in which characters have have had consequential encounters with individuals or objects from possible futures. When those futures no longer exist, the ramifications on the "present" still remain.

There may be a concern that the multiple timelines would make the book prohibitively confusing for the readers. The books rarely reference the "real" timeline in which Peter and MJ were married, and it's readily explainable to anyone who could understand It’s a Wonderful Life, Back to the Future (maybe that’s why Bob Gale was on the book) or the right episodes of Family Guyand Futurama, which have dealt with similar plots.

Some readers were confused about what's changed and what hasn't, but in most cases the specific backstory isn't that important. All the writers had to do was clearly establish the status of the characters in the book. The specifics of how the Brand New Day status quo was reached was largely unnecessary. All the readers need to know to understand the new books is whether Venom hates Spider‑Man (easy to establish) or whether Kraven or Harry are dead, and that’s only when that’s relevant for a storyline. How long it took Spider‑Man to stop wearing the black costume isn’t much of an issue for the average Spider‑Man VS Vulture storyline.

The Rest of the Marvel Universe

There was some concern about whether the changes in OMD/ OMIT should have had more of an impact on the Marvel Universe, although the marriage’s effect on events in other titles has usually been minimal. While Peter was watching a movie with Mary Jane when he found out about the prison break-in which led to him joining the New Avengers in the first issue of that series, there’s no reason to assume that he wouldn’t have joined the Avengers if not for MJ. Bendis doesn’t even need to establish any possible subtle ways events in New Avengers would be different without MJ. All the reader needs to know is whether Spider-Man is an Avenger, and whether the others know his identity, both of which have been established.

The queries do tie into another topic of examination: Did Marvel succeed at defining what happened in One More Day?

<<PREVIOUS NEXT >>

The Infinite Spider-Man Part 5.3: The Marriage VS Aunt May's Life

Posted by Mister Mets 26 October 2011

Amongst the many angry reactions to "One More Day" were complaints that it was amoral for Peter Parker and Mary Jane to give up their marriage to save Aunt May's life. Some readers argued that they would never have made such a sacrifice, although this assumes that two fictional characters would respond to an outlandish situation the same way as a particular reader.

While you could argue that it would have been characteristic of Spider‑Man to reject a deal with a shady figure like Mephisto, this seemed to be a situation in which either decision would have been appropriate. Joe Quesada argued that Spider‑Man would have probably made the deal to save the life of a random stranger. He believes that it was important that Mephisto sought Spider‑Man out, instead of the opposite.

What do you think Peter would do if Mephisto came to him and said, “Do you see that woman standing there on the street corner? I know you don’t know her, but I’m going to kill her. Or, perhaps “She’s dying of cancer and I can save her.” However, if you give me your marriage, it’ll save her life.”

How would you feel, how would fandom feel if Peter said, “Nope, sorry, go ahead and let her die.”

Many have said that they can’t conceive of why Peter would choose someone else’s life over his own happiness, especially if that someone else is old. They do somewhat exaggerate May’s age and ignore the completely selfless aspects of Peter’s character. He is the type of guy who would give up his own happiness to save the life of a kind unselfish 73 year old woman whose mother lived to be 98 and whose grandmother lived to be 102, according to Marvel Knights Spider‑Man #9. Meanwhile Mary Jane regretted not taking the bullet for May, because of the possibility she would have handled it better.

Peter did feel guilty because Aunt May was shot by someone who wanted to punish him. And some detractors of OMD suggested that as a result, the deal with Mephisto reflected poorly on him. It was also suggested that Aunt May would not have wanted Peter to take the deal. Though in fiction, there are many examples of superheroes ignoring selfless requests from people in need of dangerous rescues.

In the Spider-Man comics, the character has always valued the lives of others above anything else. This was most evident in Paul Jenkins's take on the character, which may have been typical of a tendency by British genre writers to force fictional heroes to make difficult and consequential choices. You could see it in the episodes of Doctor Who in which the Doctor must allow a tragedy to happen in order to prevent a nastier disaster. Garth Ennis summed this up when discussing the Judge Dredd stories he grew up on. Jenkins had a similar sensibility, and was more willing to explore these choices more in his stories than any Spider-Man writer, before or since. Superheroes traditionally valued the lives of the bad guys, but Jenkins made it difficult.

In Peter Parker Spider-Man #41, Spider-Man called an ambulance for a supervillain who had killed hundreds of people.

Later in the issue, he saved the life of another murderer.

In a later Jenkins story, Spider-Man refused to kill Norman Osborn, even when Osborn was promising to murder both their loved ones. He kept to it, even when Osborn later crippled his best friend.

In Jenkins & Ramos's first Spectacular Spider-Man arc, Peter Parker's refusal to allow a cancer-ridden Eddie Brock to die of natural causes was so great that he forced a reunion between Eddie Brock and the Alien Symbiote, restoring one of his greatest enemies (Venom) to full power.

I thought Jenkins might have gone a little overboard with his explanation of these themes. But it's all still canon.

If Mary Jane Had Been Shot?

Every now and then someone asks if the decision would have been more understandable if MJ was the one who was shot. You wouldn't have much argument, because there wouldn't have been much of a choice for the characters, as one option (keeping MJ alive at the cost of the marriage) was so much better than the other (MJ dies, but Peter remembers the marriage).

The decision would have been understandable. The story would have sucked. If MJ was shot, why would Peter even consider rejecting Mephisto's offer? The writers would probably have to even the scales somehow.

The outcome might be in more doubt if MJ's fate wasn't quite as bad as May's. For example, if a bullet had paralyzed MJ. Or if she had faced a life-threatening surgery in her immediate future. The latter example doesn't quite work with Mephisto, as it invites too much second-guessing. Why would he make the offer unless he knew she was going to live?

It probably wouldn't be in character for MJ to agree to the deal in either situation. And if it's just Peter who gets to decide, the "One More Day" angle changes completely.

This could have some implications for Peter's next romantic relationship. If he can't date anyone, the writers would be more restricted than they were prior to One More Day.

Would Peter Parker Have Died For Aunt May?

The chain rule works in trying to determine if the character did the right thing. We could probably agree that giving up the marriage would be preferable to dying for Peter. If Peter would die to save Aunt May, it stands to reason that he would also sacrifice his marriage to save her. And Ultimate Spider-Man has made it clear that Peter Parker would have died to save Aunt May. It's a different version of the character, but presumably he has the same morals.

The Master Planner saga, probably Stan Lee and Steve Ditko's masterpiece, also had Spider-Man risk his life to save Aunt May, after she became sick as a result of an earlier radioactive blood transfusion. So I think Peter making the deal with Mephisto was entirely in-character. It's just one aspect of "One More Day" and "One Moment in Time" which has engendered a substantial amount of discussion. Another is the use of time-travel.

<<PREVIOUS NEXT >>

The Infinite Spider-Man Part 5.2: Mephisto

Posted by Mister Mets 30 August 2011

Since One More Day, there have been many complaints on the internet that the satanic supervillain Mephisto, wouldn't be interested in undoing the marriage and that he wouldn't have the power to change history so that Peter & Mary Jane were never married.

Rereading stories with the villain from the first Essential Silver Surfer volume demonstrated how accurate the portrayal of the villain in One More Day was, when compared to his first appearances.

The Lee/ Buscema Silver Surfer stories established the villain as obscenely powerful, with the ability to traverse the universe instantaneously. He claims that he could kill the Silver Surfer in a heartbeat, but is more interested in the man's soul. He generates treasure beyond imagining from nothing and can create living monsters. He even dissolves the barrier Galactus had constructed to keep the Silver Surfer on Earth.

Several times the stories established his abilities to erase the minds of ordinary humans. In Silver Surfer #9, he decided that he didn't like the idea that people would remember seeing him, so he just erased that part of their mind.

In the preceding issue, he swore that he had the power to erase a man from memory.

He says that his hatred of the Silver Surfer crosses time and space.

And he refers to himself as a master of time.

As for motivations, he really had a hatred for all things good, as noted in this line from Silver Surfer #3.

Since the dawn of time, seldom have I sensed such goodness of soul‑ such purity of spirit‑ as I sense within the Silver Surfer. All that you are, all that you stand for, is abhorrent to the lord of the lower depths! So long as you exist, Mephisto's scheme shall ever be in jeopardy.

He just doesn't like heroes.

It would fit the character to travel the universe for the sound of a soul in pain. He's made deals with ordinary humans less significant than Spider‑Man, as in the case of the Flying Dutchman from Silver Surfer #8‑9. While there are other valid complaints about "One More Day" Mephisto was acting entirely in‑character, at least when looking at his first appearances.

I wasn't entirely satisfied with the story. As Peter Parker had just met an eerie little girl before Mephisto popped up, it seemed stupid of him to forget to ask Mephisto about her. An intelligent man/ experienced superhero like Peter should realize if you’re dealing with the devil, or his stand-in, you should ask about any information you know he’s withholding before accepting any offer. Thinking back, if Mephisto had said that the future daughter of Peter and Mary Jane was destined to be a threat to him, that would have served as an excellent justification for why it was so important for him to destroy the marriage.

Instead, Mephisto said that he wanted to erase the marriage because it was a rare and holy unconditional love that comes along once in a millennium. That struck me as fairly excessive, exaggerating the significance of Peter and Mary Jane's love for one another at the cost of making other relationships in the Marvel Universe (Uncle Ben & Aunt May, Reed & Sue, Orora & T'challa, even Peter & Gwen) seem less relevant. Rereading the Lee/ Buscema issues was an indication of how excessive and unnecessary the “once in a millennium” line was, as Mephisto wouldn’t hesitate to destroy something good, even if it’s common.

On the other hand, it countered the suggestion that Peter would be equally happy with someone else. It did reinforce Mary Jane’s belief that their love can survive anything. And it established GOD’s position about whether or not the Spider‑Man Marriage should be erased.

One complaint about the story was the lack of set-up, which was atypical for JMS. While Mephisto's appearance was predicted by many on the internet, because he works in these types of stories, there were no shocking last‑minute revelations tying Straczynski’s final issue to earlier storylines. It wasn’t suddenly revealed that Mephisto had been manipulating events throughout earlier issues, when he could have had a role in earlier stories. He could have given a prisoner the book which later provided the Shade with his powers in JMS's second big Amazing Spider-Man story. Mephisto didn’t have a sudden war with the Great Weaver or cause the storm that brought Peter, Mary Jane, Doctor Doom and Captain America to the same airport, just in time for Peter and Mary’s Jane reunion. The only revelation in OMD Part 4 tying to previous issues was the identity of the little red-haired girl, but there was no serious attempt in the previous issue to obscure that she was the possible future daughter of Peter and Mary Jane.

Granted, there's no reason to demand that the "villain" of JMS's last story to have any ties to his earlier stories, but it is a bit of a departure for him to do it like this, especially when he's had years to set this up. I’m also unable to think of any writers who chose to conclude their run on a series by featuring the hero fighting a villain from another series. The lack of foreshadowing with Mephisto was a problem was that his appearance was so consequential. If Mephisto showed up for two issues and Spider-Man told him to go back to hell, I doubt there would be any complaints that the only hint of his interest in Spider-Man was in a cameo in Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man #13. But, this story featured a major change to the status quo and concluded a six year run on one of Marvel's biggest titles, so it was going to be held to a different standard.

A purported sticking point for many readers against OMD was that this was a comic book in which Spider‑Man essentially made a deal with the devil. I think the complaints about this were largely exaggerated. These included likely bullshit claims of riots at comic book stores, and reports that it made a seven year old boy cry, because he thought that his favorite hero is damned to go to hell. If you take those at face value, you could also argue that a visceral and emotional response to a story is generally a good thing, and that Peter and Mary Jane did what they did what he did for a selfless reason (saving someone else’s life.)

Featuring a supernatual/ cosmic character in a Spider‑Man story is somewhat incompatible with the idea of Spider‑Man as a down to Earth superhero, but any solution in which the marriage was erased was going to have that problem. Quesada also explained his reasons for using Mephisto over Loki, or any other mystical characters within the Marvel Universe.

Mephisto made more sense. He had the potential power and he also hasn’t been seen in a while. There was also the fact that he had dabbled in affairs of the heart before with the Silver Surfer ‑‑ and, let’s face it, this is quite simply the kind of thing the devil would do. Also, from a neophyte’s point of view, a new fan picking this up, it’s very clear who Mephisto is. A deal with Loki doesn’t strike the same chords and would tie this story into Thor mythology ‑‑ and that just complicates matters. And why would Loki honestly care? Quite simply, the story of “One More Day” revolves around one of the most classic devices in literature, the Faustian Pact.

As similar as Mephisto is to the biblical Satan, he is a somewhat different entity. He's a stand-in for the Devil, without the specific baggage for religious readers. Quesada explained the differences.

In OMD, it's built around the classic Faustian pact. However, Mephisto is an interesting character within Marvel, I remember reading Stan's account of creating Mephisto. And while he had some of the trappings of Lucifer or Beelzebub, he is not meant to be Satan or have any religious implications. Stan built Mephisto as a super villain, but used the archetypes of the traditional iconography of the devil from classical literature and illustration. He always stopped short of making or naming him Lucifer, Satan or Mephistopheles or saying he was the devil. I get why he would create a character like this; it's low hanging fruit. The devil, or the idea of a devil, has been one of the greatest villains and mischief makers in literature for centuries. But, Stan most likely didn't want to start digging in and entrenching this super villain character that would interact inside a superhero universe within Christianity or any other religion. Also, there were probably greater sensitivities to doing this during the ‘60s than there would be later, as we created characters in the ‘70s like Daimon Hellstrom: Son of Satan – who incidentally is not Mephisto's kid. So, while some may look at a character like Mephisto and say, "Hey, he's Lucifer," I would venture to say that he is something else.

There was more Marvel could have done to make the story less blasphemous. Mephisto's comments about having a victory over the highest power were discomforting. When OMD was delayed, Marvel commissioned additional issues of satellite titles Sensational Spider-Man and Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man. FNSM writer Peter David used the opportunity to explore J. Jonah Jameson's reaction to an unmasked Spider-Man, while Sensational Spider-Man writer, had God tell Peter that everything's going to work out, a story which served to undercut the much more important "One More Day" storyline.

Quesada's visuals for Mephisto were stunning, and I thought JMS's take on the character was creepy and memorable. He gave the devil's stand-in some great lines. "I will go anywhere, do anything, for the sound of a soul in pain"reflected the first page of the story, in which Peter wanted to know if the universe was listening to him. Presumably Mephisto was the red bird in that issue. "That's another story. You're not ready for that one yet and I'm not yet ready to tell it. Soon, though?" is both evasive and intriguing. "You said you would do anything to save her. Is that true or was it a lie?" is a great way to cause Peter to doubt himself. Of course, Mephisto’s big line “I want your marriage” was ridiculous and ripe for parody.

While Mephisto's role as the antagonist was controversial, things would have been quite different had the antagonist and his wife not agreed with his offer.

<<PREVIOUS NEXT >>

Infinite Spider-Man Part 4.6: The Resurrection of Harry Osborn

Posted by Mister Mets 12 August 2011

One development in One More Day mostly unrelated to the secret identity and the removal of the marriage was Harry Osborn's return from the dead. Considering the speculation that even Gwen would return, it wasn't exactly a surprise.

While the storyline in which Harry Osborn died was possibly the best mega-arc in the Spider-Man comics, his death did leave a void in the supporting cast. He was Peter Parker’s best friend, in addition to a flawed individual, a combination that can make for interesting stories. The writers tried to shoehorn Flash Thompson into the role -with some success, especially in Dematteis’s second Spectacular Spider-Man run- but it wasn't the same.

As the blogger, A Less Than Reputable Source said...

Like much of Brand New Day, I wasn’t too chuffed about it to start with but then I got it: Peter Parker needs a best mate. The interplay between Peter and Harry is marvellous, even in the first issue of Brand New Day when Harry lends Peter money more to stop him whining on about the Parker luck than to actually help him out.

For about an year, there was a lot of speculation that Harry's return was tied to Peter Parker's deal with Mephisto in One More Day. An answer Joe Quesada gave in an interview suggested that, at the very least, that this was something Marvel had considered.

And Harry? Well, there's always a price to pay when you make a deal with the devil.

You could certainly make the case that Harry Osborn may not have died if Peter and Mary Jane had not been married, as he may not have snapped the way he did in “The Child Within.” Though that would have had some major repercussions for stories that required Harry to be believed dead. Had Mephisto been involved in Harry's return, at some point, Peter might have been placed in the appalling position of possibly having to choose between the restoration of his marriage and his best friend’s life. It’s worth noting that Peter didn’t know Mephisto had the power to resurrect anyone, and did not ask the devil stand-in to do this, so I wouldn't have had problems with the development.

Marvel chose to go in a different direction. The questions raised by Harry's resurrection were answered within the year. While later writers could always decide that Mephisto was somehow responsible, there was nothing in the story of Harry's death and return that couldn't have happened if Peter and MJ weren't married. The goblin serum that was supposed to have killed him only made it appear as if he had died. Norman Osborn was aware of this, but chose to keep his son's survival a secret.

Continuity remained mostly intact. It's been established that Harry was married to Liz, and that their son still exists. There was some premature speculation that the Harry Osborn in Brand New Day obviously dumped his wife/ the mother of his child because she wasn’t young enough, but there was nothing to support that. Eventually readers learned that Harry was on fairly good terms with Liz. Though Peter Parker was still his friend, which should count for something when considering Harry's character.

Some complained about the structure of Harry's return, suggesting that it should have been a bigger deal. They'd have liked to see it as the payoff to a longer storyline, rather than an afterthought. It was a lost opportunity, but taking advantage of it would have come with significant disadvantages for the Brain Trust, the group of Spider-Man writers in the beginning of the Brand New Day era.

The equation for the Brain Trust was simple: one story was not as important as an year's worth of stories, especially since they already had a period in which Peter Parker had quit being Spider-Man, during which changes to the status quo could happen in the space between pages.

Harry's return was a means more than an end. Incorporating some required beats: Peter Parker being surprised, Peter Parker being paranoid and Peter Parker being cynical would have delayed plot points which required Harry's return to be widely accepted early in the Brand New Day era. Harry's resurrection had to occur prior to Peter's return as Spider-Man, so his role as a backer of Bill Hollister and relationship with Lily in the mayoral election wouldn't be completely forced. There's no one else who would have functioned as effectively as a link between Peter Parker and Bill Hollister, which was necessary for that mega-arc, which would otherwise have been delayed for some time -along with the planned conclusion with Mayor J Jonah Jameson- if Harry's return had occurred as an "A" plot.

The writers could have changed Bill Hollister's background so that he can be a candidate for mayor, somehow aware that Harry Osborn is still alive. Perhaps he could have been on the right congressional committee or something. That would allow them to establish a Lily/ Harry relationship, prior to Harry's public return, but it still requires a link between Peter Parker and a prominent politician, and having someone else serve in the best friend role until Harry's return.

Delaying Harry's return would have complicated the introductions of Carlie Cooper and Vin Gonzalez. who were planned from the beginning as members of the supporting cast, given Carlie's ties to Lily and Vin's ties to Carlie. You'd need a new way to tie Lily into the series, or somehow delay the introductions of two important characters: a romantic interest for Peter, and his future roommate.

Making Harry's return the payoff of the "A" plot would also have contradicted other plans, including focusing on new villains for the first six months. And if Harry's return wasn't the "A" plot, it would have overshadowed whatever the "A" plot was. That wasn't a problem in One More Day, in which other events (Spider-Man Unmasked, the end of the marriage, Aunt May's fate) were more significant than the revelation that Harry was still alive.

Sometimes writers and editors have to choose between two flawed options. Especially when time's a concern, to say nothing of the further complications of four writers simultaneously testing a format that really hasn't been done in mainstream comics.

Someone suggested that Harry’s return was worth six months worth of stories. Though I'm not sure the return of Harry Osborn would ever be worth 18 issues (or 2 1/4 Dark Knight Returns) of main story points and fallout. There are benefits to figuring out ways to skip that stuff. Especially since the writers want to tell their own stories.

You could have done a story later in which Peter suddenly became suspicious of Harry's return, but it seems none of the writers was interested in telling that story. As an aspiring writer, I don't know how happy I'd be to be told that I get to handle something that's sure to be controversial. I really wouldn't have minded Harry Osborn showing up alive and well with no explanation at the end of OMD. Nor would I have minded a gap between OMD and BND allowing me to set up the pieces to tell whatever story I wanted.

The reaction to Harry's return was shuffled off into an issue of Amazing Spider-Man Family. On the other hand, the issue was written by the excellent JM Dematteis. It briefly raised the profile of that title, and gave those interested in the emotional fallout of Harry's return a single-issue story exploring all of that. It wasn't something that needed to be the main plot of several Amazing Spider-Man storylines.

Harry Osborn left the series at the end of Brand New Day, but he'll probably be back at some point. The character's better alive than dead, considering all the stories that could be told with him and how well he could fit into the supporting cast. It's possible that there was less need for him during the period in which Peter & MJ were married, as she could fit the best friend role, in addition to being the romantic interest. If a writer decides that Peter Parker just needs his best mate, they always have the option of bringing Harry Osborn back into the fold.

After all the mini-essays about what Quesada could have done, it's time to look at what he actually did.

<<PREVIOUS NEXT >>

The Infinite Spider-Man Part 3.2: Defining retcons

Posted by Mister Mets 18 July 2011

An example of a retcon.

Before and after One More Day, many readers expressed their opinion that it would have been much better for Spider-Man to become a widower or get a divorce than to have any sort of magic retcon.

It’s somewhat indicative of how terms like "retcon" are immediately given negative connotations, when there is nothing inherently bad (or good) about them. Retcons are simply stories which change the continuity context of previous tales. Like any storyline, a tale with a retcon has the potential to be average, mediocre or astounding, regardless of the writer, the artists, the characters or whether or not the story exists mainly to solve a problem the editors have.

Sometimes the term is used incorrectly. I get the impression that some people just use it as shorthand for a story they did not like. One difficulty in discussing retcons, as a concept, is that it's a recent term, specific to serial fiction, so it hasn't been defined by Websters, or Encarta.

Dictionary.com on the other hand has a definition...

retcon
/ret'kon/ retroactive continuity.
The common situation in fiction where a new story "reveals" things about events in previous stories, usually leaving the "facts" the same (thus preserving continuity) while completely changing their interpretation. For example, revealing that a whole season of "Dallas" was a dream was a retcon.
This term was once thought to have originated on the Usenet newsgroup rec.arts.comics but is now believed to have been used earlier in comic fandom.[The Jargon File]

In his book Writing for Comics, Peter David describes the three different types of retcons. The first is when writers tie disparate story elements together to make the mistakes seem intentional (IE- Roger Stern revealing that Ned Leeds's inability to fight the Foreigner's goons was proof that he wasn't really the Hobgoblin.) The second is when stories put modern spins on pre-existing continuity (IE- John Byrne's revelation that Lockjaw was an Inhuman.) The final category of retcons is when stories establish a new and distinct continuity, sometimes with the aid of an explanation in a continuity altering event, such as The Crisis of Infinite Earths.

Mephisto remaking the Marvel Universe so that Peter and Mary Jane were never married would qualify as the latter sort of retcon. Had One Moment in Time established that Mephisto just mindwiped everyone in the world, it technically wouldn’t be a retcon, as everything still happened just the way it was portrayed on the page. The characters just wouldn't remember a thing.

The assumption that any such story would be bad, predated One More Day, due to a negative perception against stories which exist to change elements of the status quo writers or editors are uncomfortable with. While a crap story can still fix the status quo and lead to better stories in the future, in which case the payoff would be worth it, there was no reason that any such story had to suck. One More Day was flawed, but that was for plenty of other reasons than the decision to opt for a magic retcon (or a mindwipe.)

Some of the best Spider-Man stories ever were created to fix problems writers had with the franchise. "Nothing Can Stop the Juggernaut" was written to get rid of Madame Web, because Roger Stern didn’t like the idea of a mysterious old psychic woman knowing Spider-Man’s identity. "The Night Gwen Stacy Died" was written because Editorial wanted something to shake up the books, while Gerry Conway thought that two ongoing storylines had gone stale: Peter Parker’s relationship with Gwen Stacy, and Spider-Man's conflicts with the Green Goblin, which would consistently end with Norman Osborn once again forgetting his supervillain identity.

Other Retcons

A retcon which worked in the Spider Man books was the revelation that the Hobgoblin wasn't Ned Leeds. Some might argue that it wasn't actually a retcon, as Roger Stern had always intended for Roderick Kingsley to be the Hobgoblin. Stern might disagree, as he admits that the story was no longer his the moment he left the title. When Peter David wrote Amazing Spider-Man #289, he intended Ned Leeds to be the Hobgoblin, and later writers built on that development. So I consider the Hobgoblin Lives to be a retcon, even if I like the story, and even if it was based on Stern's original plans.

The Winter Solider storyline in Captain America is an obvious retcon, but it wasn't even the most significant in the series. Hell, Bucky dying and Captain America going missing during a World War 2 mission was a retcon, contradicting all the stories in which they were alive and well and kicking communist ass in the 1950s. Those stories had their own continuity concerns, as they made it impossible for Bucky to have been fighting alongside Cap in World War Two.

While my preferred method of changing Spider-Man's status quo would have involved retconning the revelation that Mary Jane had always known that Peter Parker was ever Spider-Man, that would have been a retcon of a retcon (Peter David refers to this as a stetcon) as that particular revelation (more on that one later) had changed the context of earlier Spider-Man stories.

Some might ask how a retcon differs from a previously unrevealed secret. The distinction is that a retcon contradicts prior continuity somehow. For example, Jenkins revealing that Aunt May's father killed her uncle wasn't a retcon, because it was never established otherwise. Guggenheim's revelation that Lily Hollister kissed Peter Parker to distract him so that he wouldn't discover that she was a supervillain was not a retcon, as Guggenheim was aware of that context when he wrote the scene. If Grant Morrison were to reveal in Batman that Thomas Wayne faked his death, and arranged his wife's murder because she had cheated on him with Alfred, that would fall in the category of a retcon by contradicting previously established information in a way the original creators (and most subsequent ones) had never thought of.

<<PREVIOUS NEXT >>

Dark Avengers 1-10 quick summary

Posted by bps 30 October 2009

So due to hype created about Mephisto appearing in Dark Avengers #10, I took it upon myself to find a preview for Dark Avengers # 11. I actually like what I saw. As such, I decided to catch up on all the Dark Avengers's comics from 1 -10. Reviewing Dark Avengers will not be a normal thing here though.

In my opinion, the story is really nothing to jump for joy about. I like the team that Norman Osborn has put together however - a bunch of crooks that are doing good, in a way.

I do have a slight problem understanding how Sentry is still standing in issue # 10, after his head was blown off in issue # 9.

Towards the end of what I have read so far, Norman is being haunted by his old Goblin self. Also, I have a feeling that the Void, Sentry's/Bob's alter ego has taken control.

I find it strange that Daken is tall when he is not in his wolverine costume, but is as short as his father when he is wearing the costume.

Here is the jist of what I got.

Norman is now Iron Patriot, trying to control his Goblin personality from taking over his mind

The Sentry has two personalities - like Norman, and is trying to keep in under control, with Norman's help

Ms. Marvel / former Moonstone is a slut - makes the personal lives of the Dark Avengers interesting though

Noh- Varr is the Dark Capt. Marvel, who quits the team when he learns it is made up of villians

Ares is of course a Greek god of war. He has a son that he does not know how to show love to. His son, with his fathers knowledge - unknown to the rest of the team, is working under Nick Fury

Daken (Wolverine's son) is Wolverine with a mow-hawk.

Hawkeye or bullseye, has an interesting personality, but is mostly not interesting

Venom - Macgargan/ former Scorpion, is now Spider-man. He needs some medication to stop him from eating everyone. Not to mention keep his Spider-man image. Of late, he has been taking too much medication and is behaving feminine