Dave Galanter
December 1st 1969 - December 12th 2020
He was loved.

Amazing Spider-Man Message Board >> View Post
·
Post By
Smithville Thunderbolt

In Reply To
Mr Honey Bunny

Subj: Re: Would resurrecting Harry Osborn be a good idea?
Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 at 11:25:53 pm EDT
Reply Subj: Re: Would resurrecting Harry Osborn be a good idea?
Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 at 07:48:27 pm EDT

Previous Post

> > Then, Jenkins' pace wasn't good at all : Without the Queen arc, you still had 11 issues, that is to say almost a WHOLE YEAR of stories to adress Flash's condition.
> > You're telling us here editors should not interfere in the writers' stories, fine, but what's your point ?
> > As far as I know, the Dock Ock arc WAS Jenkins' story, the Lizard' arc WAS Jenkins' story, as well as issues 14, 21, 22 and 27, in which he didn't adressed the Flash subplot... knowing from issue 21, at least, that Marvel will end Spectacular. He chose to write a story about Poker (huh ?!), Mindworm (Huh?! again), instead of adressing the Flash subplot. It seems it prevailed over the Flash's suplot...it shouldn't IMO.
>
> Well, that's your opinion. He was writing it as he saw fit.
>

Yeah, it's my opinion that when you cripple a character like Flash (or any other main characters) and that you know you'll have your title cancelled (and even if it's not the case, not adressing it for a whole year is already bad in itself ...), that adressing it should prevail over the rest instead of writting stories you want to write. That is called respect to the readers.
And I think I'm not alone to think that way.

> > That's only make things worst : It was HIS RESPONSABILITY to put a final word on this, he didn't.
>
> Because...he didn't get a chance to. Why is that so hard to understand? He evidently wanted to take it somewhere, being that he kept writing it and hinting that Flash was getting better, but other stories, other writers and the title getting canceled got in the way.

C'mon, are you serious ? 11 issues (even giving you credit for the 6 part arc that was forced into him by that "terrible" editor !) is not enough to get a chance ? How many years should have been necessary to adress Flash's case again ?

And, on the other hand, you have PAD, who managed to reintroduced Flash during FNSM 4 (As part of The Other, WHICH WAS FORCED TO HIM BY JMS AND THE EDITORS !), and who used him for 12 issues out of the 21 isues he wrote on FNSM ! (FNSM 6, 11 to 13, 15 to 22) And see how much he did using the character ! And PAD, just like Jenkins, was thrown out of FNSM, but contrary to him he gave us a beginning, a middle and an end with his plots.


> Yeah, it's my opinion that when you cripple a character like Flash (or any other main characters) and that you know you'll have your title cancelled (and even if it's not the case, not adressing it for a whole year is already bad in itself ...), that adressing it should prevail over the rest instead of writting stories you want to write. That is called respect to the readers.
> And I think I'm not alone to think that way.

I agree. I am frustrated by how many writers these days leave hanging threads for others, and how the new writers consequently fail to pick them up. I think Jenkins, Millar, and JMS are all guilty of this in recent Spidey history. PAD was a breath of fresh air on both counts.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 2.0.0.6 on Windows XP
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2021 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2021 by Comicboards/TVShowboards. Software Copyright © 2003-2021 Powermad Software