tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2734283773701136760.post1551618665536197474..comments2024-03-26T20:11:01.933-04:00Comments on NOT BLOG X: PETER PARKER, SPIDER-MAN #95 - September 1998G. Kendallhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12279461069684403792noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2734283773701136760.post-50287689008506929582015-05-27T22:20:03.712-04:002015-05-27T22:20:03.712-04:00No plans for the relaunch. I doubt I have anything...No plans for the relaunch. I doubt I have anything new to say re: Mackie's writing that I haven't already said, and honestly there are elements of that era I don't want to ever revisit. G. Kendallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12279461069684403792noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2734283773701136760.post-91230686420167835962015-05-27T16:48:09.872-04:002015-05-27T16:48:09.872-04:00I know I've said it before, but I'll just ...I know I've said it before, but I'll just note, since it came up, that I was very happy with Mackie's selection at this time. He was my favorite of the four Spider-writers and I was looking forward to more of his PETER PARKER: SPIDER-MAN "street-level" type stuff bleeding over into AMAZING. It's weird because I never liked his X-stuff, but Mackie had generally been my favorite Spider-writer going all the way back to WEB's "Name of the Rose" storyline (when, at the time, I'm pretty sure the sister titles were written by Michelinie and DeMatteis).<br /><br />Now I admit that I haven't re-read any of his stuff since it was published, so it probably is as dull and poorly written as G. says here. But at the time, for whatever reason, Mackie's Spider-Man resonated with me more than DeFalco's (too bland), DeMatteis' (too dark) or DeZago's (too little substance).<br /><br />But in retrospect, I'm pretty sure I just liked the Romita Jr. artwork. Mackie had worked with Romita going all the way back to the "Clone Saga" and in my mind they were inextricably linked. The more I think about it, I'm pretty sure I would've liked Mackie's work much less if it was illustrated by Joe Bennett or Luke Ross.<br /><br />(Though, on the flip side of that notion, I barely tolerated Straczynski's AMAZING even with Romita's art, so there must have been at least <b>something</b> to Mackie's writing that appealed to me.)<br /><br />All that said, with regards to this particular issue, for some reason I thought it actually was acclaimed. Interesting to learn it was the opposite. Maybe I just figured it got good reviews because the concept felt like it should.<br /><br />G. -- I can't recall if this has been asked and answered before, or if you're keeping mum, but will you continue into the relaunch? That was where Mackie's mediocrity finally started to become evident to me, and I'd be curious to see your thoughts on it.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14580725636327122073noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2734283773701136760.post-18440471866791468532015-05-25T01:49:08.310-04:002015-05-25T01:49:08.310-04:00Tom DeFalco wrote a book in 2004 called "Comi...Tom DeFalco wrote a book in 2004 called "Comic Creators on Spider-Man". It's a little weird because he interviews the various creators and often times he was intimately involved in the stories himself. But still a good read. <br /><br />There's a page in the Mackie interview that seems to confirm @Anonymous' theory...<br /><br />Q. When Marvel re-launched the entire franchise, you were chosen to be the sole Spider-Man writer. How did that come about?<br /><br />A. It wasn't something I sought out. I mean, it's not like I went in and petitioned for it. It just happened, and I was surprised to be chosen. I enjoyed the way things were, the four of us working together . Being the only writer was pretty lonely.<br /><br />Q. Did you want to bring back Aunt May?<br /><br />A. Absolutely not! As you may recall, when Marc first pitched the death of Aunt May I helped him act it out. I loved that story. I didn't want to bring her or Norman Osborn back. I dug my heels in, but it was made clear to me very quickly that the new Editor-in-Chief was calling the shots, and both Aunt May and Norman were coming back. I was either going to write those stories or someone else was.<br /><br />One last point from the book. One of DeFalco's earlier questions/comments in the interview is...<br /><br />Q. Marc was our spiritual father, because his stories were always full of philosophy and insight. You handled the street level scenes, and Todd just had a real knack for contemporary dialogue.<br /><br />If that was the common belief I could see why Mackie would be picked. The reboot definitely wanted to go back to a street level Spider-Man.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2734283773701136760.post-89242008665068269712015-05-23T13:54:03.225-04:002015-05-23T13:54:03.225-04:00I think there was a sense at the time that online ...I think there was a sense at the time that online fans only represented a small fraction of the audience and weren't worth listening to. Negative online response to the announcement of CHAPTER ONE didn't deter Marvel, obviously.<br /><br />Mackie was close to Byrne and Harras, so from their perspective, maybe they viewed him as a natural fit for the new direction.G. Kendallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12279461069684403792noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2734283773701136760.post-90727531608071785792015-05-23T12:28:36.750-04:002015-05-23T12:28:36.750-04:00So why Howard Mackie? After your reviews of PP,SS ...So why Howard Mackie? After your reviews of PP,SS it's even more amazing to me that this writer would have been picked to write both parts of the Spider-Man relaunch.<br /><br />I get that Bob Harras, both at Marvel and DC, has a taste for writers who will do what he wants (Lobdell and Mackie in particular). I even sort of sympathize with him, if only because he gets so much grief from reviewers who prefer writers with more strongly individual styles, and because his biggest success as an editor - Age of Apocalypse - was an example of a comic that had to have a strong editorial hand guiding it.<br /><br />But in 1999, especially after the successes of 1998 had largely been due to good writer/franchise matchups (Busiek/Avengers, Priest/Black Panther), literally doubling down on Mackie seems like one of the biggest blunders that cost Harras his job.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com