Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Marvel Animation Forum' started by GregX, Aug 9, 2009.
I'd love to read that. Do you have a link for it?
Marn, no offense, but maybe comic book superheroes just aren't your thing. Personaly, I have to side with a lot of others on this: video games and TV show are two very different things, so what works in one won't work in the other. Nemesis Wonder was right: "beat the big bad guy" doesn't equal good storytelling nor the goal of every story. And it's clearly not the intend of this show, as said by Greg Weisman himself. The storyine of Spectacular is "the Education of Peter Parker."
Regarding Greg's X's points, I personally have to agree with them.
The goal- Beat the main villain.
Subplots- Beat side villains which tie into main plot.
Focus- Beat villain.
Supporting Characters- Optional 2 or 3.
Average Length- 10 dungeons.
Dungeon Format- Fight a bunch of henchmen while making your way to the boss.
The goal- Whatever you want. Optional.
Subplots- Whatever you want. Optional. Does not need to tie into main plot.
Focus- Whatever you want. Optional.
Supporting Characters- Required 4 or 5. Optionally more.
Average Length- 52 episodes.
Episode Format- Whatever you want. Requires a lot of character interaction.
Video Games are completely different from TV shows. If nothing else, TV shows allow much more creativity on the part of the creator, as practically everything is optional, while video games have to be action-centered.
I have a theory that you only do this to annoy us and spark one-sided debate. I've always wondered why you spend so much time arguing about a show you claim to hate when you could just as easily spend it elsewhere. But to rewatch episodes of a show you claim to hate?
I recall that someone once impersonated you on Ask Greg and posted your complaints about the show. Later, you went on and apologized on behalf of that person. (Or maybe the apology was the impersonator....) Well, if you've been reading responses on Ask Greg, then you would have clearly gotten the answers to most, if not all, of your gripes/questions. Yet you still persist with them. And why were you even on Ask Greg if you don't like the show?
Just face it: I'm on to you. I know. You love The Spectacular Spider-Man.
Nice thoery, but not exactly. I don't go to Ask Greg and only learned about someone impersonating me by Antiyonder sending me a PM about it. I simply felt I had to clean the mess of whoever impersonated me.
And I never really claimed to hate SSM, just disagree with the writing of the second season. I liked the first season, and for what it's worth it's still mildly entertaining, and better than 99% of the other stuff on television. I just have issues with it, is all.
I'm not really into comic books for that reason, no, I usually find the animated adaptions to be more enjoyable since they feel a bit more focused than the 50 years of continuity they're based on. I suppose that's why I liked the first season more, it felt more streamliend and focused, while the second feels a lot more like a typcal comic book, which I'm not a fan of. If it really is about 'education of Peter Parker', which seems like a more professional way of saying the 'monthly adventures of the hero' format of the comic books, then you're right in saying it probably isn't for me anymore, no.
Not all video games have a story, or action, usually just RPGs and action games. There's puzzle and simulation games and numerous others. Video games can be just as diverse as television shows.
Despite that, Zuko and Azula were major character up until the end, which you can't really say for people like Big Man or even Goblin (who is absent for quite a few storylines, like the Venom one) It would have been nice to see more of Ozai, yes, but but he was always mentioned and portrayed as the goal from the first few episodes. Not the best example I could use, but it works well enough.
Aha! You like it! You admitted it!
No, actually "The Education of Peter Parker" means how he's evolving as a character, and a person, and all the lessons he's learning throughout his various struggles. It's about the hero, not the villain....
Wait, you were talking about those?? Dude, how can you even begin to compare the video games without stories to TV shows?
Actually, correct me if I'm wrong, but Zuko did not appear in episodes 5, 7, 10, 11, 14, 16, 17, 22, 26, 31, 33, 36, 38, 42, 43, 44, 47, or 48, and Azula did not appear in episodes 1-19, 22, 24, 25, 26, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34, 35, 37, 38, 42, 43, 44, 47, 48, 52, 53, 54, 56, or 57 (except for an actor).
That means Zuko was only in 42/61 episodes, an Azula was only in 20/61 episodes.
Now, Big Man appeared in person in episodes 1, 6, 7, 9, 12, 13, 22, and 23, and behind the scenes in episodes 4, 5, 18, and 21. Gobby, meanwhile, showed up with mask in episodes 7, 8, 9, 23, 24, 25, and 26, and as just Norman in episodes 1, 4, 5, 6, 14, 17, 20, 21, and 22.
Therefore, Tombstone's hand was at work in 12/26 episodes and Gobby's in 16/26 episodes.
Comparing these numbers to those of Zuko and Azula, it's about same ratio. Zuko's is around 2/3s, and Gobby's is almost 2/3s. Azula's is about 1/3, and Tombstone's is nearly 1/2. So, yeah, it's pretty even....
Just because Norman isn't in every episode doesn't mean he doesn't influence the over all story arc. Look at the Dark Lord Sauron and Count Dracula, they barely appear in their respective novels, wouldn't you consider them major characters?
By the way, Norman did appear in the season 2 Venom arc.
And as I recall, Aang didn't really have anykind of goal for the first half season or so of Avatar beyond penguin sleding. He spent most of his time bumming around having wacky adventures while Zuko chased him all over the map. Toppling the Evil Empire certainly wasn't his first priority.
Looking over the series again, it would almost seem like Peter himself is the Big Bad. His existence resulted in the creation of most of the villains:
If he wasn't fighting crime, Tombstone wouldn't have associated himself with Norman. Thus, Sandman and Rhino never would have been.
If Norman was never involved with Tombstone, he wouldn't have become the Goblin to strike back at him when he was threatened meaning that he never would have turned Octavius into Octopus. Thus Green Goblin and Octopus never would have been. In fact, Norman likely would have been killed by Toomes in episode one.
Venom, nuff said how Peter essentially created HIM.
No Octopus means probably no Mysterio. No Goblin in S2 means no Molten Man.
Of course, Electro Vulture and Lizard would all still be around so Spidey did good in stopping THEM.
"Typical Parker luck!"
It is a good Spidey tale that makes Pete the cause of his own misery. Of course it's a classic Spidey that has him realise this and still go on (see the end of the Lizard ep).
Don't forget Tombstone, Hammerhead, the Enforcers, Silvermane, Silver Sable, Chameleon, Black Cat, and possibly some others I can't think of at this moment, would still be around regardless of Spidey's involvement.
Well, it was Spidey who drove Max over the edge, leading him to take on the identity of Electro. If that hadn't happened, Connors' lizard DNA would not have been indirectly tampered with and the Lizard, presumably, would not exist either.
I did realize a while ago the irony of Spidey's first "damsel in distress" being Norman Osborn (which is further hammered down in Intervention when it is the first thing he flashes back to as an accomplishment), and that Peter choosing to act as Spider-Man is the central reason behind pretty much every tragic outcome in the series. I doubt this is unintentional, and I can't help but wonder if Peter will realize it at some point.
Peter choosing not to act as Spidey got Ben killed, and now acting as Spidey resulted in the creation of nearly all the supervillains and the destruction of innocent peoples' lives. The universe has it out for him.
And then, whenever they show would have happened if he HAD stopped the robber we learn that Peter would've basically become a bad guy. So I suppose it's a choice between supervillains or Evil Peter.
I'll take supervillains any day! It makes for a much better story!
Villains who would not exist without Spidey:
1. Electro (He'd have his powers, yes, but Spidey pushed him over the edge.)
2. Lizard? (It's unknown exactly what would have happened without that jolt, but there's a good chance there'd be no Lizard....)
3. Shocker (Created to distract Spider-Man.)
4. Sandman (Created to distract Spider-Man.)
5. Rhino (Created to distract Spider-Man.)
6. Green Goblin? (It was the Vulture's which pushed Norman over, actually, but he might be dead. Then again, I'm unsure if Vulture actually would have killed Norman - he needed him alive as he was the only one who could reveal that Toomes created the technology - death was possibly an empty threat.... However, if Gobby did exist, he may have gone after a different goal than Big Man, since Norman and Tombstone would not have made an alliance.)
7. Doc Ock (Since Norman and Tombstone never teamed up, Gobby has no reason to kill Octavius.)
8. "Venom" (But the symbiote still would've been around, so who knows. Whoever Black Cat was working for would've gotten the symbiote, and it's unknown what would've happened from there, but a "Venom" would exist - it just wouldn't be Eddie.)
9. Mysterio (No Doc Ock, no Mysterio.)
10. Kraven (Never comes to New York, never mutates.)
11. Calypso (Never comes to New York.)
12. New Enforcerers (There's no race to get more supervillains, so I doubt Tombstone would've needed them.)
13. Molten Man (Created to kill Spidey.)
That's thirteen less villains - technically fourteen if you split up the New Enforcerers.
Villains who would still exist:
2. Enforcerers (but no upgrades)
6. Green Goblin?
8. Black Cat
10. Quentin Beck (but not Mysterio)
12. Miles Warren
13. Blackie Gaxton
14. Colonel Jupiter (though his anger wouldn't be directed towards Spidey, it's hard to say exactly what would have happened, but his aggression was part of his condition either way.... It just probably would have taken longer....)
15. Silver Sable
So only 14-16 villains would exist.
Well, I wouldn't count Blackie as a Supervillain since he's just a guy who hangs out at Montana's bar until Goblin fingered him at random.
Miles, well I think he was found and convinced to come to New York by Norman as a replacement for Otto. So he wouldn't be in NY doing bad stuff either.
Still, fact stands that for the most part Peter created most of the SUPERvillains. The normal ones were the ones he fought to begin with.
From what we've seen of Warren's character he'd probably just be doing bad stuff somewhere else, the man's a jackal through and through.
Sure city wide destruction might be nonexistent, but these many of those supervillains would still commit crimes in some form. Afterall, Alex and Flint were criminals before Spider-Man made his presence.
The Big Man was a likely a crime boss before Spidey made his presence known. Adrian Toomes became the Vulture because Norman Osborn cheated him out of credit for his inventions.
To illustrate my point, here are some quotes from Batman The Animated Series in which a similar accusation is made towards Batman:
But what I'm saying is that Spidey in SSM is actually guilty of what the villains are accusing Batman of: Him being around DID create them. Flint and Alex wouldn't have become super-powerful and dangerous supervillains if not for him, they'd just remain ineffectual two-bit thieves. Norman would never have been contacted by Big Man and been forced to become the Goblin to protect himself, in fact he'd likely be dead at Toomes' hands (sparing a lot of people further grief). Norman not being involved would change the entire series since he was the catalyst for everything that happened after "Catalysts" (if you buy the theory that he was the one who hired Black Cat to steal the symbiote).
In other words, the world may have actually been better off if Peter wasn't Spidey...
But if you're talking about one life, even norman's, it goes against the hero's ethics. Then you begin talking about, well, should one man be sacrificed for the greater good? Superheros like Spiderman and as we saw in the dark knight, batman will not sacrifice anyone. I mean, all it takes is for batman to kill the joker to saves hundereds of lives, but he chooses not to. But because of that, joker will always find a way to break free from arkham and wreak havoc, killing tons of people. Yet batman still does not kill him.
And of course, looking at this from an outside perspective, its a tv show. Things have to be interesting to continue on. The drama and conflicts have to be there to maintain the interest, while there has to be some cohesion to the story.
And say, if spiderman didn't even exist and yet these bad people still stayed true to their immoral values, these people are still going to be bad and someone else would probably stand up against them. The story however may just ravel itself in a different way. Or say if norman were to have died, then harry may want revenge on toomes and harry may grow into someone who is immoral without a dad (because we've seen how devious harry can be), or he might me just as heroic having his dad die (just like peter parker losing his uncle) and he may become a superhero. So the cycle will happen, just differently.
Makes me want to see the "What If?" version of what the SSM world would be like if Peter had simply not been bitten, or if he had stopped the Cat Thief anyways. Maybe Tombstone would have contracted Norman to create Supermercenaries anyways for reasons other than Spider-Man, if Norman survived Toomes.
There are these guys at tv.com doing a series of What If? stories in a contest. One of them was a story like this where the Thief robbed the place before Peter got stiffed by the Wrestling manager so Peter stopped him and became a big entertainment star. Norman died but other villains still existed (Rhino was now "The Elephant", Ock was now "Doc Squid", Vulture was the Pteradactyl, Electro was now Freezo) and the main villain was a guy called the Red Goblin. Turns out it was Harry driven mad. (The story was really tongue in cheek with serious moments, so don't be offended by the campiness)
I never said I hated it in the first place.
The amount of episodes they're in isn't important, it's the focus of the story. The Fire Nation in general were the main focus of Avatar's quest; specifically, for Aang to take it down. It's mentioned in the opening narration, and throughout the entire series. He may not fight them in every episode, but it's still the point of the show and most of the things they do is to progress to that point (learn the different bending styles and so forth). Its different for most superhero shows, where they have no real plot or story and it's just their weekly escapades with whatever villain is the bad guy of the week..
Sauren himself wasn't involved much, perhaps, but his armies and minions were, especially when most of the people being corrupted by the One Ring were usually from his influence. The entire point of LOTR was to throw the ring into Mount Doom, so everything the heroes did was about that goal. Even if we agree Norman influences everything, the show still isn't about Peter's quest to take him down, he's just a reoccuring villain.
The premier ended with him setting a course for the North Pole so he could learn Waterbending for that purpose. He may not have accepted it fully until later on, but it was still the point of the show.
As it has been stated many times before the focus of the story is not "Spidey beating the bad guy" but "the education of Peter". We continually see Pete's story as he grows up. The goal of the series, a guess at this stage, is graduation not some big villain that Pete has to take down.
That's what sets it aside from most other shows that it is about Pete as much, if not more, than it is about Spidey.