Full disclosure, I haven't read the issue yet, but it's because I have no interest in reading this new direction. I do read comics and was actually hoping to use the whole Superior Spider-Man relaunch to finally start reading a Spidey ongoing, but I have no interest now that I know what direction they're going in.
Anyway, on to my commentary.
Man, I was very disappointed with this episode, it felt condescending and amounted to nothing more than several minutes of Bob telling us all that it's only going to be temporary so we should all calm down. No one who actually reads comics thinks this is going to be permanent or game changing, that's not why people are upset. Many fans are upset because they don't like the story and don't see it as a fitting or necessary "end" to Peter Parker's story, that serves as little more than the latest in a string of series of pathetic industry-wide publicity stunts.
Spoilers because this portion of my comment is kind of rant-y and very much written from the perspective of a fan of the character.

KoDOmega:

Spoiler: Click to 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

The whole rape thing. Seriously, it is massively creepy and wrong, and the reaction from Marvel editor Stephen Wacker to the controvesy has been especially disappointing. Wacker essentially said that it wasn't an issue and that people who were offended where looking to be offended, which, no they weren't Stephen, you're just a tone deaf idiot who let rape implications get into your flagship character's book. This isn't even the first time something like this has come up, the Chameleon story that Bob praised in the video featured Chameleon masquerading as Peter and having sex with one of his love interests, before Marvel hastily backtracked and claimed that the two had merely made out after people called them on treating rape by fraud as a joke in their comic. This is a huge deal that speaks volumes about the way that women and the subject of rape are treated in comics.
I mean, for the record I don't think that Marvel and Dan Slott are actually going to go ahead with an MJ/Spider-Ock romance, but even the implication is skeevy, and as KoDOmega mentioned any relationship that the "new" Spidey gets into will be on shaky ethical grounds.

I am incredibly disappointed in Bob this week. He had a chance to talk about the story merits of this "ending" to a character with decades of history, as well as the potential, both good and bad, for this new direction, not to mention what it says about comics as an industry and some of the unfortunate sexual politics therein and how comics seem to actively discourage female readers. This could have been a fascinating and engaging episode, but instead Bob chose to crap out a lazy, predictable, preachy, and irrelevant piece about how it's going to be temporary and stuff like this has happened before, succeeding in completely ignoring that ACTUAL issues at hand. Genuinely disappointed in Bob, I expected far better coverage of the issue, especially after his thoughtful retrospective of Supergirl's history and what it tells us about comics as a whole. Not impressed at all.

If I recall my mad scientist correctly Doc Ock has a massive sence of entitlement, which will probably make some interesting internal conflict along the lines of whether or not to help himself to some of the loot the bad guys he just twarted were holding onto. It'll also be funny to see him trying to preen over whatever public victories he has, only for the police to try and arrest him because the Daily Bugle says he's a bad guy. Along that line I expect to see J.J. dangling off a few buildings whenever there's bad press.

Now that I think about it maybe it'll be a lot like a Deadpool comic.

I enjoyed clone wars and some of the stuff after that, around 2000 is when marvel went to sht and nothing was good anymore. AFAIAC Most comics finished up in the 90s. I deny the exitsitance of anything past then. LOL

Here's the thing about it, I don't particularly mind Peter being replaced as a whole. Legacy heroes exist in lots of fiction and some of them can wind up better than their predecessors (I contend Wally West > Barry Allen). The problem is that Peter's death felt...weak.

I mean Barry Allen died because he ran so fast against the flow of an antimatter bomb he caused it to malfunction and died in the process due to rapid ageing, Supergirl died after a huge beatdown she gave the Anti-Monitor, Doc Ock died after a pretty impressive brawl against the Spidermen (clone saga I think, Kane was there).

Heck, even Ultimate Peter died after saving dozens of people from a gang of villains attacking him and giving Green Goblin a MASSIVE beatdown. And that death was treated really well, everybody showed up for it and you could see the genuine sorrow on everybody's face that knew him. The "affirmative action" thing might have been a root cause but at least it was done well to get it.

Norix596:
As someone who has never followed an American style comic consistently, I never understood how it was possible to care about what goes on in this kind continuity/status quo arrangement when everything that happens that matters/ is significant is generally bound to be undone or retconned out in a year. That kind of seems to undermine the entire point of this kind of infinite continuity if these stories are functionally separate in that they start and end at the same status quo.

It helps in cases like this, where the actual story was a lot of fun. The continuity may be a horrible mess, but I checked out this arc(and the previous one, with the hobgoblins) because it sounded exciting. And it was! It was a nice story, and I would totally recommend giving it a look.

SilverHammerMan:

I am incredibly disappointed in Bob this week. He had a chance to talk about the story merits of this "ending" to a character with decades of history, as well as the potential, both good and bad, for this new direction, not to mention what it says about comics as an industry and some of the unfortunate sexual politics therein and how comics seem to actively discourage female readers. This could have been a fascinating and engaging episode, but instead Bob chose to crap out a lazy, predictable, preachy, and irrelevant piece about how it's going to be temporary and stuff like this has happened before, succeeding in completely ignoring that ACTUAL issues at hand. Genuinely disappointed in Bob, I expected far better coverage of the issue, especially after his thoughtful retrospective of Supergirl's history and what it tells us about comics as a whole. Not impressed at all.

I think what's more telling is that, sadly for Bob, the whole rape thing flew under his radar. That's not his fault... if he didn't catch onto the controversy, he can't report on it. But, again, HE DIDN'T EVEN HEAR ABOUT IT. Plus, he hasn't read the comic, so he can't comment on the imagery therein. And if he don't know about it, he can't comment on it. And if he don't know about it, IT'S BECAUSE NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT IT. And Bob's usually got his ear to the ground on these things, so I don't slight him for not picking up on it. NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT THE OBVIOUS RAPE OVERTONES IN THIS NEW BOOK. That's... worse than one internet critic missing a theme.

KoDOmega:
I think what's more telling is that, sadly for Bob, the whole rape thing flew under his radar. That's not his fault... if he didn't catch onto the controversy, he can't report on it. But, again, HE DIDN'T EVEN HEAR ABOUT IT. Plus, he hasn't read the comic, so he can't comment on the imagery therein. And if he don't know about it, he can't comment on it. And if he don't know about it, IT'S BECAUSE NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT IT. And Bob's usually got his ear to the ground on these things, so I don't slight him for not picking up on it. NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT THE OBVIOUS RAPE OVERTONES IN THIS NEW BOOK. That's... worse than one internet critic missing a theme.

Yeah, I'm very, very disappointed in the comic book community on this one. Some of the sites that I frequent have talked about this stuff, but for the most part actual comic news sites and a lot of bloggers have ignored this incredibly messed up direction. I mean, as I've said, I pretty sure Dan Slott isn't so dumb that he'd actually go ahead with MJ/Spider-Ock, but even the implication is utterly disgusting, not to mention that like you said, this is an immense violation of Peter as well, though given how comics seem to recoil from the idea of men being sexually assaulted I doubt that'll get any consideration.
I really do feel like this should be a much bigger issue than it's being treated as right now, and I hope that if Marvel actually does go ahead with this pairing that is clearly rape, that they get in major shit for it. It's high time the mainstream media and advocacy groups took cape comic publishers to task for their pervasive misogyny and horrible sexual politics.

I stopped reading Spider-Man comics after Gwen Stacy had Norman Osborn's bastard Goblin children (Talk about screwing up decades of established continuity. Literally...), but hearing about all this, it doesn't really bother me that much, especially since everyone here knows that someway, somehow, Parker's coming back. I'm actually debating following this. Ock's always been one of my favorite villains. I'm curious about a Spider-Man story for the first time in a decade, so somebody's doing their job right.

I'm more pissed about what they did to the X-Men, but that's another kettle of fish.

While I hate to see Peter Parker get the short end of the stick, Spiderman has not been interesting for a very long time. The last time I enjoyed reading a Spiderbook was during the Civil War. I don't read all the time mind you, but a lot of writers just stick to the status quo and don't shake things up. Whether this is good or bad has yet to be determined, but different is not bad by virtue of the fact it's different.

Edit: The upside is that Ock has always been one of Spiderman's more thoughtful villains. He isn't just bad because that is easy. His character has had external stimuli that has lead him down that path, and it's really interesting to see him do a 180 because he all of the suddenly has a lifetime worth of heroic memories. Slott in the end seems to understand that outside of experience, we are only memories. That is important and all too human. Given the situation, it's plausible the character would do a flip. Now my brain is just struggling with how scientifically impossible it is to transfer memories from one person to another. That is why I love comics though, because scientific impossibility doesn't matter.

Nghtgnt:
I doubt Doc Ock will ever have sex with MJ precisely because of the rape implications and also because Marvel has been down this road before with another character (I think it was Chameleon) and they specifically mentioned that he and the female character DIDN'T have sex. So really, it's sad and funny and silly to see people continuously bringing this up and being upset about something that will likely never even happen.

But back to issue 700...

I read it, and thought it was okay. It wasn't the big deus ex machina that OMD was, and I found Peter's final day to have been a rather moving story, especially the part where he sees all of his loved ones who had died.

By the way, for the OMD-haters, while it wasn't necessarily the best-written idea ever your anger is misplaced - be angry instead with the decision to have Spider-Man reveal his identity during Civil War.

Civil War itself was stupid. By that time just HOW many times had the Sentinels gone rogue and killed hundreds if not thousands of NON-mutants?

Never mind that every survivalist-anti government paranoid would have realized that anything powerful enough to take out a mutant that could take on armies would be able to take out the armies themselves. Yet people in the Marvel universe *supported* this insanity.

IMHO OMD is symptomatic of another problem in comics--characters are not allowed to truly evolve and get kicked back to some defacto status quo. Heck thanks to Flashpoint, Crisis itself and all related to it has been retconed out of existence meaning that the "original" Earth-1, Earth2, etc are out there...somewhere.

I've read Spider-Man as a kid and check it out on and off over the years, don't know why people are so upset he's basically Perter Parker with Doc Ocks memories. Not such a bad idea IMO, it lets him explore a darker side which he basically couldn't explore before because it would be out of character.

I'm actually really interested in it. Still hate One More Day, just because it was born out of such petty spite, and because there are a million better ways to accomplish it than "Peter makes a deal with Satan for the life of a woman who's gonna succumb to age in a couple years regardless."

This, though? This has potential. Personally, I hope there's gonna be a Scarlet Spider crossover, because yeah.

Still, the writers at Marvel seem to really hate Peter Parker. He gets shunted in every big crossover, not to mention his alternate counterpart's dead. I think that's the biggest problem with these stunts, in that they just won't give the guy a fucking break. I mean, they already took his life, and now he's lost his fucking body.

Yeah the way the story was written Peter will be back sooner or later.

ccdohl:

theultimateend:

ccdohl:
Escapist forumgoers use the word "interesting" too much.

Sounds cool I guess, but if Parker is brought back just because his memories overtake his body again, will it really be Parker, or just Doc Ock still in Parker's body, but with a memory problem? Peter will remain dead, and his consciousness will be lost.

It was used 6 times not counting your post on the front page.

You, by contrast, was used 40 times.

There are plenty of words used more often than "interesting".

But that was an interesting observation I guess.

Not sure what your point is, since "you" is a pronoun without many alternative words to use but thanks, I guess.

I didn't realize you were a wordcist.

What did pronouns ever do to you!

Pronouns are people too!

theultimateend:

ccdohl:

theultimateend:

It was used 6 times not counting your post on the front page.

You, by contrast, was used 40 times.

There are plenty of words used more often than "interesting".

But that was an interesting observation I guess.

Not sure what your point is, since "you" is a pronoun without many alternative words to use but thanks, I guess.

I didn't realize you were a wordcist.

What did pronouns ever do to you!

Pronouns are people too!

I guess it's just my upbringing. Being from the American South, I guess we should just be happy that I can read at all!

From the few reviews/complains I did read about #700 (to be fair they also may have been like bob and only talking about if by guessing what was in it), it seemed that there wasn't any stated 'peter's mind/the doc's mind sharing the same head' sorta deal, I was under the impression it was fully 'peters dead and doctor octopus is the new spider-man' and they just assumed that later down the track they would alter it so that it was actually 'no no, they're both in there and peter's fighting to take control'.
I haven't read a lot of the other comments here, but can anyone who actually read it confirm if they explicitly said they were both there and not that its purely what we assume they'll retcon in to get rid of the story arc at a later date?

Damn he makes a lot of good points. I'm just annoyed since this seems pretty much like what they did in the Ultimate Marvel Comics universe. The premise is fundamentally the same; get rid of the main character and replace him with someone else.

Avengers Arena is a total rip-off of Battle Royale by Koushun Takami and Masayuki Taguchi. Just felt that needed to be said.

I agree with Bob that the basic premise (villain pretends to be hero) is actually a pretty interesting one. They're just doing it in a unnecessarily gimmicky way. That turned me off from reading it straight away.

I don't actually think drawing a comparison to OMD is appropriate here, because this is a genuinely interesting idea, whereas OMD was the stupidest goddamn thing to happen to comics in...well, not really that long, as Bob points out, but it was pretty damn stupid nonetheless. I think the difference is that here, they've got a good core premise ("what if Doc Ock reformed and replaced Spiderman as a superhero") and they're just going about it in the standard, tacky, attention-grabbing way ("Spiderman is dead forever and Doctor Octopus is his replacement! For reals this time!").

Whereas with OMD, the whole point of the storyline was to enact some ill-advised retcon to the character because Joe Quesada felt like it. There was no premise, or if there was, it was "how can we make Spiderman not married anymore?" And then they just did it in the stupidest, most shallow way imaginable. I don't want to go on and on about it, but it didn't even make sense for the character - Peter was basically dodging responsibility by making a deal with the devil. And then they retconned the retcon and it turned out that they weren't married but were basically de factos so the whole thing didn't change anything, it was just...ugh. I can't even write about it without ranting.

But yeah, there's no real reason to compare this to OMD. OMD was a marketing ploy disguised as a storyline. This, however, is an idea with a fair amount of potential and meat to it, and it could be bad or it could be good.

I still won't read it; the double-whammy of Batman: RIP and OMD turned me off comics entirely a few years back. I just can't handle the industry's pathological need to undo all the character development they've achieved every few years. It gets absurd. It gets really, really dumb, and I wish it wasn't so dumb.

KoDOmega:
Basically, Doc HAS to either tell his sexual partners he's actually a reformed supervillain in a superhero's body or else ANYTHING they do could be considered rape by fraud,

Crying foul over magic sci-fi mind rape? What the hell does it even mean? And just to be fair (and clear) "rape by fraud" is probably the most nonsensical thing I've ever seen someone type on the internet. If someone is already reaching that far, they wouldn't have to reach much further to pull almost all sexual relationships into the rape category. No one is ever who they make themselves out to be. Many people don't tell their partners about every little unpleasant detail about themselves, women wear makeup, Men might wax unwanted body hair etc. Heck, if someone is actually a homosexual and they attempt to be with a woman (it happens when people are trying to discover who they are) technically that is also "rape by fraud" since that person implied they had a different sexual identity. My best friend got into a serious relationship with a girl from our school who turned out to be crazy (literally, she has to take meds). He didn't know she was crazy before they had sex, isn't that also "rape by fraud?". She did make herself out to be better then she turned out to be.

Trying to segway sexual mistakes or regrets into rape is retarded. Rape is rape, and it's a serious thing that isn't complicated at all. If you look into the eyes of your partner and don't realize they've brain swapped with an octopus scientist, that's your own problem. Having sex with them isn't rape, it's a mistake... because you were perfectly happy to do it. You were perfectly happy to do it, and not because you were drugged, or drunk, or forced by threat of violence... no, anyone in that situation would just be stupid, and that falls under the category of regret, not rape. One day the internet might learn there is a difference between these two things, one day...

I think some of us place more importance on stories than the companies and writers that make them.

For some of us once this becomes apparent me either give up on an industry or become apathetic to its trends.

I know Bob doesn't respond to these, but maybe someone who agrees with him will...

Now, to be fair, I haven't read Spider Man in a WHILE. I didn't like One More Day, I came back for American Son and was mostly disappointed by the following few issues (except the two Rhino ones. Those were awesome) so went back to ignoring it. I dislike Slott's Spider Man from back in the Marvel Team Up days, so when I heard he was taking over, off I went to not reading it. So I don't know how good or bad this story has been, nor does it affect me in any way.

STILL, every argument I see of people going "fans shouldn't be upset" involves two, basic arguments:

1) There's been worse.

2) It'll blow over.

I suppose both of those are true. Still, does that mean you enjoy ANY thing people write? What IS a bad story? Do we no longer complain about things that are bad because there are things that are worse? Or because something better will come along eventually?

That's like saying "I don't see the big deal about Transformers. I mean, I've seen worse movies!"

I don't follow the comics anymore, but I understand the uproar. I think its silly that you don't.

The idea that Ock wants to try and be a better hero, I can see where that would be intriguing. But they killed Spider Man to do it and have Ock walking around in his body unbeknownst to his friends and family. Not only is the death a blow, but the supplantation of his life becomes a violation.

People want to see their heroes go out with dignity and this story basically has Ock taking a big dump on his legacy.

Its odd to me that you can appreciate and acknowledge the absolute disdain people had for the Ms. Marvel mind control rape scenario, yet you dismiss this as just fans getting uppity because that is what fans do.

Oh, and since I get so tired of hearing this terrible logical fallacy, just because there exists something else worse, does not make something okay or even good. I would rather that people are able to express that something is bad, rather than take the attitude that they just accept it all because someone, somewhere, put up with more and didn't complain (mostly because they didn't have the ease to do it at the time).

But if you are going to take that stance, maybe you should consider how much worse Spiderman 3 was to ASM and think about how often you feel the need to complain about it.

I am always a fan of giving off the mantle of a hero.

For example Bruce Wayne is now 80 or something. Peter Parker should be in his late 50's, but they are both still written the same age as they started, despite them also aging somewhat in the comics.

A new Spidey or something could really work well. Different character traits means different stories to tell and isn't that what it's all about? Telling stories that interest the reader using a recurring character?

Though I disagree on One More Day, mostly because I can't get MAD at 1960's writing because it's the 1960's. This is the 2000's. Things have evolved past Bat Baby.

Now could it have been done differently than Identity theft and body snatching? Yes... but they didn't. If anything can be brought up as an issue with Ocspidey it's the fact that he basically snatched his body and got away with it. Unbeknownst to ANYBODY in other words he's wearing Peter's Skin like a suit.

I honest to god hope he doesn't start a relationship with one of Peter's old flames under the pretense of still being Peter, that would pretty much be this characters downfall because he just became a criminal, again.

I stayed way from every spoiler on the Internet. I bought & read ASM #698 & 699 because they led into 700. I read 700 with my friends. We howled with nerd rage, to the point of HULKING OUT!!! How the fuck could they do that?! I get coming up with compelling comic book storylines is a crapshoot, but letting DocOck's body die with Peter's mind in it?!
I still can't wrap my head around how Octavius could just switch from bad to good just from seeing Peter's memories (and yes, I know Otto's head was switched with peter's in those memories.) and nobody catching on Spider-Man wasn't acting like himself. Dan Slott may have a strong grasp on Marvel continuity, Spider-Man's in particular, but he really throws the Idiot Ball at the character's who aren't SM, including the other superheros.
[angry sigh] Well, if there's one way to reverse this nonsense, this is a case for the Doctor (Strange, that is). Although this might be interesting: http://www.comicsalliance.com/2013/01/08/hulk-superior-spider-man-teaser-smash-fired/

xPixelatedx:

KoDOmega:
Basically, Doc HAS to either tell his sexual partners he's actually a reformed supervillain in a superhero's body or else ANYTHING they do could be considered rape by fraud,

Crying foul over magic sci-fi mind rape? What the hell does it even mean? And just to be fair (and clear) "rape by fraud" is probably the most nonsensical thing I've ever seen someone type on the internet. If someone is already reaching that far, they wouldn't have to reach much further to pull almost all sexual relationships into the rape category. No one is ever who they make themselves out to be. Many people don't tell their partners about every little unpleasant detail about themselves, women wear makeup, Men might wax unwanted body hair etc. Heck, if someone is actually a homosexual and they attempt to be with a woman (it happens when people are trying to discover who they are) technically that is also "rape by fraud" since that person implied they had a different sexual identity. My best friend got into a serious relationship with a girl from our school who turned out to be crazy (literally, she has to take meds). He didn't know she was crazy before they had sex, isn't that also "rape by fraud?". She did make herself out to be better then she turned out to be.

Trying to segway sexual mistakes or regrets into rape is retarded. Rape is rape, and it's a serious thing that isn't complicated at all. If you look into the eyes of your partner and don't realize they've brain swapped with an octopus scientist, that's your own problem. Having sex with them isn't rape, it's a mistake... because you were perfectly happy to do it. You were perfectly happy to do it, and not because you were drugged, or drunk, or forced by threat of violence... no, anyone in that situation would just be stupid, and that falls under the category of regret, not rape. One day the internet might learn there is a difference between these two things, one day...

Yeah, no... no, you're wrong. Rape by fraud isn't a "nonsensical thing" someone typed on the internet. As it says in the Wikipedia article I linked, it is an actual crime. It is different than changing something about yourself. In that instance, you are still YOURSELF.

Let's just roll out the theoretical scenario. Let's think about this from the perspective of, let's say, Mary Jane Watson. She's missed Peter for so long, and now he's so much more confident, and you spark up the relationship again.

And then she finds out she actually had sex with the man who murdered him.

Do you think she will conflate this with dating a guy who didn't come off as crazy on their first date? With someone who has far more body hair than they let on? Of course not. SHE'S GOING TO BE DISGUSTED. Violated. Like someone raped her.

Because someone did.

Listen, I get that this issue can be a bit confusing. We really are dealing with situations that, to my knowledge, cannot occur in real life. But that doesn't mean we should be putting our protagonists into situations where they can even be THEORETICALLY raping people unless it's going to be a part of their character (although, the amount of character-appropriate situations for a protagonist, let alone a superhero, to rape someone seems... nonexistent to me). This is just being played like "oh, haha, wacky romantic situations ensue" and that is the wrong approach. Period. You were right about one thing, though. Rape is pretty uncomplicated. It's when someone has sex when they don't want to. And having sex with someone you didn't think you were definitely falls under that umbrella.

Bob, I value your opinions as a critic, probably too much as I ingest almost all of your videos and reviews. That said, I frequently disagree with your point of view and especially when it comes to Spider-man.
Here, however? I very much enjoyed your opinion and to be honest I'm relieved you feel the way you do, though I'm not sure how I feel about the fact that you haven't read it yet. I'm not sure if that says poor things about your professionalism or the state of story-telling in the industry

First off I'm going to talk about the issue itself. I think it's great. It was a joy to read, watching Spider-Man and Octavius butt their heads intellectually but in reversed body roles, as they pull out all new dirty tricks on each other and attempt to outwit their opponent in a wide-spanning battle of strategy. There is also plenty of opportunity for humourous dialogue that pokes fun at the situation and genuinely touching moments in the form of Peter's memories where we get call backs to some of the best parts of Spider-Lore. Aside from the creepy parts between Ock-Spidey and MJ, which I'll get to in a minute.
But all in all the issue was just damn well-written by Slott as Bob predicted, displaying a masterful grasp of a wide range of characters.

Now, to deal with other things, such as what this pleasant forumite has said;

SilverHammerMan:
-snip-
This was not a fitting ending for the character as far as I'm concerned, and to see why you need look no further than the recent death of Peter Parker over in Marvel's Ultimate comics. The way Ultimate Peter Parker went out was pure Spider-Man; alone, forsaken and abandoned by all the other superheroes, fighting and winning against his greatest enemies to protect his loved ones even at the cost of his own life. It was dignified, tragic, emotional, and effective. It was a pitch perfect sendoff to the character.
By contrast, here Spider-Man goes out with a whimper, having been outwitted and defeated by the guy who's really only his arch-nemesis when the Green Goblin is unavailable, and dies basically hoping that the guilt trip he downloaded into Ock's head will somehow make a stone cold murderer, a man who months previously tried to kill almost the entire population of the planet in order to be remembered as history's greatest monster, into someone who won't use his stolen body to destroy everything that Peter Parker cares about. Bull. Shit. Peter Parker wouldn't accept that, he wouldn't let that happened, that's like his whole deal, that when the universe shafts him yet again Peter Parker turns around and says "No, fuck YOU!" and keeps fighting because people depend on him. I simply cannot buy that the same Peter Parker from that classic scene in the flooding tunnel where he almost gives up but then pushes himself to the breaking point to save Aunt May, would allow Doc Ock to walk away with the potential that he would hurt Spidey's friends and family. I simply cannot buy it.
-snip-
The whole rape thing. Seriously, it is massively creepy and wrong, and the reaction from Marvel editor Stephen Wacker to the controvesy has been especially disappointing. Wacker essentially said that it wasn't an issue and that people who were offended where looking to be offended, which, no they weren't Stephen, you're just a tone deaf idiot who let rape implications get into your flagship character's book. This isn't even the first time something like this has come up, the Chameleon story that Bob praised in the video featured Chameleon masquerading as Peter and having sex with one of his love interests, before Marvel hastily backtracked and claimed that the two had merely made out after people called them on treating rape by fraud as a joke in their comic. This is a huge deal that speaks volumes about the way that women and the subject of rape are treated in comics.
I mean, for the record I don't think that Marvel and Dan Slott are actually going to go ahead with an MJ/Spider-Ock romance, but even the implication is skeevy, and as KoDOmega mentioned any relationship that the "new" Spidey gets into will be on shaky ethical grounds.
-aaaaand final snip-

Okay so I'm gonna talk about these two issues.
1 - Issue 700 as an end for Spider-Man
2 - Implications of Rape

1 - I completely agree with the point of view being portrayed by several enthusiasts here. Now you can say that issue 700 doesn't end the character in a dignified way or in a way that does him justice and all that malarkey. I take a different standpoint. It just plain doesn't end the character. It fails in that regard. Spider-Man is a fucking freight train of pop culture significance that has been rolling for fifty years now. Fifty. Fucking. Years. You do not simply derail a character like that in such a flippant way as this. That is essentially the problem with writers in the comic industry who think they can sway the direction of these iconic leviathans in the space of their run, as opposed to just working on the small elements.
If issue 700's twist presented itself as a new story arc as opposed to THE END OF SPIDER-MAN it would have been swallowed far better by audiences. It even works better with the idea that Peter Parker is still alive somewhere. That creates story potential for how Pete gets free, and if he does - Is he a better spider-man than Ock, the Superior Spidey? Imagine Peter awakening from a coma in Ock's body months later to find the world in love with the Superior Spider-man. He now has to decide whether or not it's right to want his title back - Is he doing it for the greater good or for self-gain? Hell, Dan Slott could spin that shit into gold.
Everyone is basically ignoring the story potential of Moriarty being in the body of Sherlock here because of terrible attempt to kill Peter Parker.
Wait no, I phrased that poorly. It wasn't terrible, it was weak - Insufficient. Forgettable. This is not the death of Peter Parker. Crumpled and forgotten in a villain's body? Completely unrecognised by his family and friends? Where is Aunt May falling to pieces? Where are the people he's fought his whole life to protect quaking with rage at his killer? Where is the funeral over-flowing with those who finally, post-humously appreciate this hero? In other words, where is everything that happened when Ultimate Spider-Man died?
What I'm saying is that this "end" isn't bad, that's not the problem. The premise isn't bad, the writing isn't bad. If it was that simple, that'd be okay. It lacks conviction. I get the idea that Slott wasn't all that dedicated to killing off Peter at all. I've read all of Slott's run and if I know the writer, this is not how he would approach killing Spider-Man. He would include far more spectacle and make it far more memorable. But he didn't because his agenda was clearly to set up an interesting new story arc rather than toss another plot twist into the "To be retconned" in-pile.
I would almost think that Spidey's "death" was an editorial mandate thrown in to make issue 700 pack a larger punch. In my opinion, Superior Spider-man could be seen as one of the classic Spider-Man storylines, up there with Kraven's Last Hunt, the death of Gwen Stacy, Venom, et cetera - IF it wasn't going to be associated with a flippant and premature "death" for spidey that is so easily going to be rendered undone.

Now, part two.
2 - Rape Implications
Yeah, this was just a poor choice. Beyond poor, it was dumb. Whether or not they actually apply or not is a non-issue. Whether or not Marvel is going to pursue the plot-line of Doc Ock manipulating MJ or Carlie or anyone into a sexual situation, which assume and hope to God that they won't, it was just a very poor choice to even include the possibility both from a marketing and narrative standpoint.
In terms of a narrative choice? The entire scene between Ock-Spidey and MJ is creepy as all hell. What's more, this is essentially the moment when MJ and Peter's romance is finally fulfilling the promise to be rejuvenated and THAT'S how they decide to do it? With a creepy old super-villain secretly in his body? What?!
I'll be honest, this is how I came into issue 700; I hadn't had a chance to get or read 698 or 699 because I'm so damn cut off from comics. I'd remained spoiler free until then but I had to buy issue 700 because I'm a spidey fan and it's sort of important, so I caught up on the spoilers and just launched into Spidey 700. And holy crap. That's what was waiting for me on the first page? MJ being seduced by Ock through Spider-man's body? Eurgh. It wasn't easy to get me back on board with the idea of the story arc. It is just tonally dissonant with the rest of story arc. This is a story about an evil super-villain with robotic octopus arms using a golden octobot to swap brains with Spider-Man.
Things that are okay to include with the above premise; Super-villain team ups. Robots. Brightly coloured costumes. Classic Hero/Villain dialogue. Emotional flashbacks & test of character integrity.
Things that are generally not okay to include with the above premise: Curiously specific deals with the Devil and scenes that are suggestive of rape. Seriously.
And from a marketing standpoint it's a bad fucking decision because hello? Joe McNobody who doesn't frequently read comics probably only knows a few things about spider-man. Spider-bite origin, death of Uncle Ben, flamboyant supervillains, red-headed girlfriend. So if it IS your girl to appeal to this guy and get his pocket change, then it's not going to help to further convolute an already over-written and downright confusing romance.

So all-in-all? There are mis-steps here. But curiously, I think these mis-steps lie as a direct result of how the story was packaged. If this was just a story twist with an unknown conclusion it would be getting nothing but praise. But because the numbers lined up, this had to be a big fucking landmark in Spidey-history so everyone was expecting something to redefine/end Spider-man's story which seems to be the third or fourth time something in Marvel has been FOREVER REDEFINED AND CHANGED this week. The best stories, of course, don't have to rely on spectacle or grandiose display to be good or memorable. All they need is a simple, strong premise like a super-villain viewing the world through a superheroes eyes. Unfortunately in this case that story idea has been overwhelmed with trashy, forgettable spectacle that no one is going to appreciate.

Invadergray:
Side Note: Kraven's Last Hunt was awesome.

Indeed!
I stopped reading Spiderman in early 1988 because nothing was measuring up to Kraven's Last Hunt. In fact I had pretty much switched to DC/Vertigo about that time due to Suicide Squad and Doom Patrol. Ahhh those were wild heady days for Comics. People lament the post DKR comics but those people forget Suicide Squad and Doom Patrol, they just remember the dreck like Lobo...

The best part of Spider-Man isn't actually Spider-Man, it's Peter Parker and how he balances his life being a hero with all the "normal" stuff like a job, relationships and family.

And actually seeing his life progress and change, not suddenly revert when things get interesting. Parker having a kid with MJ would have been a proper continuation of his character. It would be another step in his life. And would have been pretty cool. Especially if the kid inherits his or her dads powers and we see mini Parker running around on the walls of Avengers HQ.

Without all that character development, it's just another guy in tights fighting another guy in tights.

One More Day decided to take the easy way out. Rather than continue his character and come up with something new, they retconned his life to "recapture the glory days" even though no one asked for it.

And they're doing something similar here with Superior Spider-Man. Rather than continue Peters life they're replacing him in the weakest way possible and after the dust clears, we're back to square one doing the same thing over and over and over.

And it's not like it's like that that for every comic character. Fantastic Four Sue and Reed have kids and their lives have changed quite a bit from the early days. Xmen and near unrecognisable from what most think of when it comes to Xmen. Logan running the school now named after Jean Grey, Cyclops becoming a Magneto like figure but with the controversy of kinda rooting for him and so many changes throughout the years I'd be forever naming them all.

But not Peter, he'll never get that chance to move forward.

And yeah, I've read Superior Spider-Man today so obviously Spoilers below:

-SPOILERS-

So after reading Superior Spider-Man, it turns out that Peter Parker is far from dead. They even have a ghostly image of him show up and say, very clearly, that he's still around and trying to figure out how to get back in control. Right from the get go they make it clear this is very much a temporary thing. The equivalent of comic filler.

-ALSO SPOILER-

Apparently in April there's a Superior Spider-Man cover that says FIRED on it with the description saying "The Future of Marvel NOW! is Fired" which I think is obvious enough.
My guess fired from Avengers and his actual job. And his relationships with MJ falls to shit.
Pete eventually comes back to "fix" things. Peter back as Spidey again.

Spidey world reset. Again.

Pete is back as a photographer for the DB trying to pay the rent on his now shitty apartment while trying to repair his relationship with MJ. And we're right back to Spidey of the 70s as Marvel continues to try and make Spidey repeat the same stuff he's been doing since at least the 70s.

What can you say, people tend to attach emotionally to things they like, and the pseudo-community of like-minded individuals the internet offers amplifies the rage resulting from what is perceived as a personal attack.

Or, in other words, a very lazy lynch mob.

To be honest, Bob, I think people hate One More Day not because it had changed the "status quo" but that it was a hackneyed attempt at getting back to the previous "status quo", i.e. that of Peter Parker being that stupid childish embodiment of high fantasy with zero commitment that solves all his problems like he's still a sixteen-year-old and has to keep relearning the "great power comes great responsibility" crap.

Pretty much, One More Day was seen as one big kick in the balls to any and all character development Peter had gone through in the last twenty years. It was definitive proof that, despite being a grown-ass man, writers will never stop seeing him as the stupid selfish teenager that makes stupid selfish choices that results in horrible things happening to the people he loves.

So yeah, it doesn't really have anything to do with the silliness of the devil asking for Peter's marriage. Not to me anyway.

That being said... having not read the Amazing Spider-man #700, I do agree with you, that does sound kinda cool. I have a soft spot for villains turning good, especially when it's done out of respect for a previous hero. It's why I loved the run on X-men when Magneto took over Xavier's school when he died out of respect for his former friend, teaching and upholding his ideals despite not agreeing with them... and it's also why I hate that writers decided to make it that he was plotting something all along.

Fucking writers...

Abandon4093:
People bitched about one more day because it retconned like 40 years worth of stories. It could have been the most intelligently written and unique story in the spiderman universe, but it still retconned 40 years worth of story.

And the reason people don't like this is because it's such a massive upset to the status-quo. I agree it sounds interesting on paper, but I don't really like Doc Oc. And to have him be the one that kills him is pretty annoying. And in such a cheap way.

But yea, give it like a year and they'll say his consciousness overwrote Octavious'.

No, people rage about One More Day because it was Joe Quesada resolving his own Mid-Life Crisis by Selling Spiderman's Marriage to the Devil. Hell, even without the whole Aunt May thing(and seriously, what would she think about all that anyway?), I would have to call Outside Influence (like what happened to Harry Dresden in Changes) to make that even remotely make sense.

Regarding this, My real problem with it is the timing. It's still IMO too soon after the death of Ultimate Peter Parker (which I had no problem with) to be killing off 616 Pete, even as the usual temporary thing, and especially so after the awesome Spider-Men crossover they just did. And combined with the immigration of Agent Coulson from the Cinematic universe and introducing an Ultimate/Cinematic-based Black Fury(as original Fury's son), makes the whole thing come off as a bad indication of some serious creative stagnation back at Marvel HQ.

But aside from that, a very well-thought argument by Bob.

burymagnets:
Wow, Bob is the first person I've heard talk about Superior Spider-Man in a considered way, and not just as some whinging fanboy.

Thank you Bob.

And thank you for having actually read Slott's (excellent) run on ASM, I wish other people would. :)

Agreed!

I came here expecting the same sort of fanboy rage I've seen all over the internet. To the point of someone Photoshopping a picture of Stan Lee shredding ASM 700 and distributing it as fact.

And the one thing that they all had in common was... they didn't read it. They didn't read the lead up to story. Hell alot of them don't even read comics at all and just love Spider-Man from the movies and the 90s Animated Series (really!? At least love him for Spectacular Spider-Man instead of the 90s garbage)

I was actually ready to rip Bob a new one for not being a Spider-Man reader and reacting poorly just because a character you don't contribute sales of was changed without his permission. And I apologize to Bob for that being my reaction before I watched the video, because like the video even says... that's the way the entire Internet is reacting. I just expected more of the same.

Me personally... I've been reading Spidey on and off over the last 22 years and right around the time of Brand New Day I got hard core back into him and have been reading religiously ever since. My wife has as well. Heck I just finished reading Superior Spider-Man #1 and it's really good and continues the impression that Dan Slott is just going "Yup, I'm just trying this idea out and then we got back to normal."

He begged comic fans to give it a good three issue chance before judging it. And knowing the internet... it didn't even wait till 700 was even out before outraging over it.

gigastar:

canadamus_prime:
Yeah I don't read comic books, but I bet this won't last long before they do the whole mental battle for control thing, Peter will win, and BAM, Peter Parker will be Spider-Man again. Either that or they'll contrive some other way to bring Peter back.

Thats why i dont get why the fans are being pissy. If it sucks they can retcon it and if it doesnt they can run with it.

Oh, also...

EDIT: You know what? I bet this is simply a case of "They changed it now it sucks."

Thats how you do it.

I have to leave to go to work and you just linked me to TV Tropes. You owe me a new job! D: