Spiderman isn't a good guy, and he's in serious need of help
- Thread starter Zontar
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I like how the bolded section was lampshaded in the Spider-Girl books (Set in an alternate universe where Peter and MJ's daughter lived, grows into a teenager and takes on the mantle of Spider-Girl). A store appears capitalizing on Spider-Girl related merchandise, May (Spider-Girl) is annoyed by this and eventually finds out that her parents own the store (you'd think they'd have told her but no, because plot-contrivance) and that MJ had the idea to do it because Peter was always annoyed that he never had the opportunity to copyright his image, so she decided to quickly claim the Spider-Girl property and make merchandise, the profits going into May's college fund.Vausch said:
With regards to the issue you're talking about in the Academy (I have read the issue), I never really got behind the speech, mainly because during his first appearance and first solo book he's still working as a performer for money and even goes on live Television working through the promoter, it's practically a certainty that these people had claimed the copyright on the act and the idea of Spider-Man.
That's in the Sam Raimie (spelling?) movies and then in the main comic (whenever one of the movies is successful the comics almost always contrive a way to make themselves similar to the Movie, Spider-Man gained organic webbing, the X-Men changed their uniforms from the colourful individual ones to the black leather jumpsuits, Iron Man got a chest piece to keep his heart pumping, etc), however these changes are almost always changed back, this was one of those circumstances, he kept those powers for maybe 2 years before losing the power (never explained) and reverting back to his webshooters.The_Echo said:
You do realize that what you said changes absolutely nothing about the OP, right? In fact, if you read the OP your "concern" is already there.The Salty Vulcan said:
I guess logic may be the beginning, not the end, of Wisdom ...but we're postponing launching it.
There are a few fallacies with that point of view. The first is that being very smart means you must be very good or knowledgeable about business. being smart enough to invent something does not mean you have the resources or expertise to turn that into a viable business. Especially when school and paying bills are taking up a lot of your energy.
If you where going to sell this invention to the police, you would first have to do a bunch of testing to ensure it isn't harmful to those it is used on. Look at how long it took for tasers to actually get used after they where invented. Police aren't going to go anywhere near a product if it could result in their entire budget being spent on compensation for chemical burns victims.
Parker, who it has been established is very poor, would need major investment to get this invention off the ground, as he himself has fuck all resources. In order to get it to work he would have to drop out of school and fully commit to that project. I can see why he would choose not to.
If you where going to sell this invention to the police, you would first have to do a bunch of testing to ensure it isn't harmful to those it is used on. Look at how long it took for tasers to actually get used after they where invented. Police aren't going to go anywhere near a product if it could result in their entire budget being spent on compensation for chemical burns victims.
Parker, who it has been established is very poor, would need major investment to get this invention off the ground, as he himself has fuck all resources. In order to get it to work he would have to drop out of school and fully commit to that project. I can see why he would choose not to.
Webbing doesn't cost 300 grand. It's cheap enough a guy who's constantly broke can use it for recreational purposes.Johnny Novgorod said:
Of course, if we're bringing real-world logistics into things:
It only seems fair to bring the real-world issues.ClockworkPenguin said:
I like that you're bringing logic into this but you're misguided in the sense tat you're bringing OUR WORLD'S logic.
Spider Man lives in the Marvel universe, where aliens, gods, mutants, evil geniuses etc. are not that uncommon.
You wake up in the morning, eat breakfast, go to work when suddenly a guy throws another guy into a building and then shoots him with lasers. Must be Wednesday.
In our world, his invention would be incredible, in is world, it's just another gadget. It's handy for him but it's nothing groundbreaking.
Spider Man lives in the Marvel universe, where aliens, gods, mutants, evil geniuses etc. are not that uncommon.
You wake up in the morning, eat breakfast, go to work when suddenly a guy throws another guy into a building and then shoots him with lasers. Must be Wednesday.
In our world, his invention would be incredible, in is world, it's just another gadget. It's handy for him but it's nothing groundbreaking.
Just a thought. But imagine all those wonderful little technological marvels you see in comic books, the ones that bend the laws of physics, which seem to only come from their original creators despite attempts by others?
Imagine that person Peter let see the formula tried to have someone else reproduce it, because he's a jerk who's trying to rob a kid out of his discovery, and quickly discovers the formula doesn't actual produce what he saw in the office.
Spiderman can make that formula work time after time. He does so with household chemicals anyone has access to.
So, why can't this guy do it? Because the person they brought it to is not a Peter Parker. That's why.
Spidey only started being able to make such wonders after he got the bite. He might have been brilliant, though less so in the original stories compared with today, but somehow he creates mechanical devices and chemical compounds which are either in total defiance of scientific principals or just impossible for a kid who only has access to the most simple tools to produce.
Superheroes perform the improbable or the impossible on a regular basis. Creating the impossible is no stranger then a man who flies unaided or a woman that can stop a truck dead by planting her feet into the ground.
This isn't the only answer, but it's a nice way to subvert the Reed Richard's is useless trope in my opinion.
Imagine that person Peter let see the formula tried to have someone else reproduce it, because he's a jerk who's trying to rob a kid out of his discovery, and quickly discovers the formula doesn't actual produce what he saw in the office.
Spiderman can make that formula work time after time. He does so with household chemicals anyone has access to.
So, why can't this guy do it? Because the person they brought it to is not a Peter Parker. That's why.
Spidey only started being able to make such wonders after he got the bite. He might have been brilliant, though less so in the original stories compared with today, but somehow he creates mechanical devices and chemical compounds which are either in total defiance of scientific principals or just impossible for a kid who only has access to the most simple tools to produce.
Superheroes perform the improbable or the impossible on a regular basis. Creating the impossible is no stranger then a man who flies unaided or a woman that can stop a truck dead by planting her feet into the ground.
This isn't the only answer, but it's a nice way to subvert the Reed Richard's is useless trope in my opinion.
When it comes to those web shooters how much use do you think an average person would have for it? He has created a material that solidifies rapidly that he uses to save people in various ways and to swing himself around through town.
Have you tried lifting your own weight with one arm starting from the ground? It's quite heavy. Imagine using that to swing around like Spider-Man does. Most people would dislocate their shoulders trying that. So safety reasons. It would take more lives that it would save.
Most likely it would end up having military uses and not all of us agree with those uses. A plant hormone that controls when a tree loses its leaves and when they wither has been used for military applications with some unforeseen consequences.
Spider-Man is a genius so he should have knowledge of setting up shell companies and managing to stay anonymous... Well Batman can do such a thing since he's a business genius when it comes to business. Spider-Man isn't. That's actually quite normal. A good deal of scientists are bad dealing with people, I've had some brilliant processors that can't hold lectures and who don't know how to sell their discoveries. Albert Einstein had problems getting dressed on his own so it's not like a genius has to excel at everything s/he does.
Now I have applied real world logic to counter your real world logic. Now let's consider the fact that you apply that logic to a different world entirely.
There are people there with massive resources. If he were able to start selling the stuff it would be a few weeks at best before one of the evil enterprises secured full production over it and monopolized its use for evil.
Now everyone would have the same weaponry as Spider-Man albeit without the heightened senses and superhuman strength, it would still be dangerous. They would also have hackers that would easily be able to track him since he would have to be involved with those shell companies in some way or another. You know how long it takes to hack a series of advanced secured protocols in a comic? A few minutes, less if the building is burning.
Have you tried lifting your own weight with one arm starting from the ground? It's quite heavy. Imagine using that to swing around like Spider-Man does. Most people would dislocate their shoulders trying that. So safety reasons. It would take more lives that it would save.
Most likely it would end up having military uses and not all of us agree with those uses. A plant hormone that controls when a tree loses its leaves and when they wither has been used for military applications with some unforeseen consequences.
Spider-Man is a genius so he should have knowledge of setting up shell companies and managing to stay anonymous... Well Batman can do such a thing since he's a business genius when it comes to business. Spider-Man isn't. That's actually quite normal. A good deal of scientists are bad dealing with people, I've had some brilliant processors that can't hold lectures and who don't know how to sell their discoveries. Albert Einstein had problems getting dressed on his own so it's not like a genius has to excel at everything s/he does.
Now I have applied real world logic to counter your real world logic. Now let's consider the fact that you apply that logic to a different world entirely.
There are people there with massive resources. If he were able to start selling the stuff it would be a few weeks at best before one of the evil enterprises secured full production over it and monopolized its use for evil.
Now everyone would have the same weaponry as Spider-Man albeit without the heightened senses and superhuman strength, it would still be dangerous. They would also have hackers that would easily be able to track him since he would have to be involved with those shell companies in some way or another. You know how long it takes to hack a series of advanced secured protocols in a comic? A few minutes, less if the building is burning.
I can?t add much more than what has already been said, but Spider-Man (and some other superheroes like him) are good guys, who probably believe that they?re doing the right thing for their city/country/world. But they?re not perfect, and they never claimed to be.
When you think about it, a lot of comic book superheroes are tackling the problem the wrong way round. Peter Parker works his insecurity issues out by poking fun at criminals, many of which he knows nothing about or of their background. Who?s to say that the small-time thief that Spider-Man (or Batman, or Superman, or Iron Man, or Mr. Fantastic) beat up in a supermarket the other day was actually a working-class father who was just trying to feed his children?
But no, Spider-Man beats him up, New York celebrates him, and job?s done. Of course, that?s ignoring how superheroes tend to ?upgrade? to battling supervillains (like how Batman started out fighting Carmine Falcone?s mob before tackling the newly-emerged ?freaks?, like the Joker and Scarecrow), but it?s not as if they still don?t beat up the average crim when they?re not duking it out with villains their own size.
Finally, it might be too obvious to be mentioned, but whatever: Peter Parker is, at the end of the day, your average teenage high-schooler with low self-esteem (initially, at least), not a lot of business know-how, and other issues taking up his mind and time than patenting a product that he primarily uses to work out his guilt issues of not saving his uncle on criminals.
When you think about it, a lot of comic book superheroes are tackling the problem the wrong way round. Peter Parker works his insecurity issues out by poking fun at criminals, many of which he knows nothing about or of their background. Who?s to say that the small-time thief that Spider-Man (or Batman, or Superman, or Iron Man, or Mr. Fantastic) beat up in a supermarket the other day was actually a working-class father who was just trying to feed his children?
But no, Spider-Man beats him up, New York celebrates him, and job?s done. Of course, that?s ignoring how superheroes tend to ?upgrade? to battling supervillains (like how Batman started out fighting Carmine Falcone?s mob before tackling the newly-emerged ?freaks?, like the Joker and Scarecrow), but it?s not as if they still don?t beat up the average crim when they?re not duking it out with villains their own size.
Finally, it might be too obvious to be mentioned, but whatever: Peter Parker is, at the end of the day, your average teenage high-schooler with low self-esteem (initially, at least), not a lot of business know-how, and other issues taking up his mind and time than patenting a product that he primarily uses to work out his guilt issues of not saving his uncle on criminals.
I like how you lash out with personal attacks immediately after not giving the topic the shallowest of attempts towards comprehending the idea and then you continue building upon that misinterpretation.Feral said:
I wander what exactly does this highlight about you.
My biggest problem with Spider-Man IS the webshooters. Teenage boy who's been bullied all his life has the only father figure he's ever known brutally murdered. He takes his share of the insurance money, and goes around town buying hazardous chemicals, and specialized machine parts to build wrist mounted shooters. He also gets in a ridiculously fit condition, spends hours alone in his room, AND builds an outfit that conceals his identity. All this in post-Columbine America and post-911 New York.
To be fair this was deconstructed in Watchmen. Dr. Manhattans powers led to the creation of highly advanced technology... which in turn led to mass destruction. It could be argued that the wide spread distribution of advanced technology can lead to unforeseen consequences.Zontar said:
Or maybe Stan Lee never thought about that. Both are plausible.
People who drain all of the fun out of any particular interpretation of a superhero burn in a very special level of hell.
A level they reserve for child molesters, and people who talk at the theater.
A level they reserve for child molesters, and people who talk at the theater.
That is not something new. In comics, superheroes have recovered from crippling injuries, terminal diseases and found cheap energy sources and faster than light transportation on a daily basis. Look at Batman, Ironman, Reed Richards, even villains like Doctor Doom and Lex Luthor has proven time and again that they could cure anything from cancer to the common cold if they took a week of. Even indirectly (like Logan's blood or Ra's Al Gul Lazarus pit), the chance to analyze that technology could change the world.
Some of these (unlike a poor teenage student) even have the resources, the reputation and the legal expertise to turn those patents into commercially viable products... but no, apparently Luthor is too busy stealing cakes to fix the world's problems.
Some of these (unlike a poor teenage student) even have the resources, the reputation and the legal expertise to turn those patents into commercially viable products... but no, apparently Luthor is too busy stealing cakes to fix the world's problems.
This is why I liked (even though others complained about it) how in the Sam Raimi movies his web-slinging ability is a genetic mutation rather than something he invented. I get that he's supposed to be a genius and all, but come on: a 17 year old kid not only being smart enough, but having the resources to invent something that far ahead of the current science and technology curve (especially considering Parker is supposed to be relatively poor) was a little much to swallow.
As for the "he's a bad person!" thing. It's a comic book.
As for the "he's a bad person!" thing. It's a comic book.