Regarding Spider-Man: Brand New Day--Extra!! #1.Mr. Quesada (may I call you Joe?), do you actually read the comics that go out with your name on them? Because I simply can't believe you let this one go through.
Now note, on the cover, this comic is "Rated A," which, according to Marvel's own website, means the books in question is "appropriate for ages 9 and up."
How then, do we explain this scene, wherein Spider-Man is mocking the gangster/villain Hammerhead for having a flat head?
Really.So in an A rated book, it's alright to make none-too-veiled references to terrifically bad (not to mention demeaning) jokes about oral sex?
And to do this in a Spider-Man book, which is probably particularly likely to be picked up by kids?
And before you or your minions try to claim it's somehow not a reference to the distasteful fellatio joke, explain why Spider-Man gives us the sotto voce "You'll get it when you're older."
I'm not a prude, Joe. But I don't believe that a comic you've approved for nine-year-olds is an appropriate place for bl#$%^b jokes. And somehow, I don't believe that Peter Parker would stoop to that type of humor, either. Then again, since you had him sell his soul to the devil, maybe his standards in humor have become corrupted. Is that why we have Brand New Day--so Spider-Man can make coy references to sex acts in front of the children??
So congratulations to Joe Kelly (writer) and Stephen Wacker, Tom Brennan, Tom Brevoort, and you (all listed as various levels of editor on this story). You've dragged Spider-Man down to the level of a sniggering Hustler cartoon. Thanks a lot.
snell
14 comments:
I agree 100%
Though I'm generally enjoying Brand New Day, some of the humor is entirely distracting and/or inappropriate.
Usually I just roll my eyes at Guggenheim's stupid puns and "knowing references" (he's done how many jokes about the Spider-Man cartoon's song now?).
But this one, yeah, new low.
It is certainly time to sic Montrobot of the Deep on this "creative" team
Do kids actually read Spider-Man comics anymore? Really? When I am in comic shops and see someone ten or younger I've never once seen them with a mainstream marvel title. They usually have manga or are looking at the Marvel Adventures books. I've taught in schools in LA and NY for the last eight years in grades second through seventh and from time to time the issue of comics is brought up, in all that time exactly ONE students has claimed any interest in comics. This was a student in a sixth grade class making him about eleven. At that time in a child's life they've been inundated with all sorts of easily accessible and far more graphic material. A veiled innuendo in a Spider-Man comic, oh no, Dr. Wertham was right! Yes they probably should've rated the issue more carefully but please, let's get a grip here people. It was a fairly enjoyable issue regardless and hardly worth writing off the entire creative team.
Joe Kelly's the writer? Say no more. The guy's one of the most tone-deaf writers working. He did an extended stint on Superman several years back, and his stories were filled with out-of-left field stuff. Not quite as bad as Spider-Man's lame joke, but ham-handed stuff nonetheless.
Oh, and elgig---whatever your name is: Doesn't matter if you personally see someone ten or younger reading a Spider-Man book. If Marvel gives the book an "A" rating, then it needs to reflect those standards...so if a kid or parent *does* want to buy it, then there should be a reasonable expectation for the material to reflect the rating without the wink-wink, nudge-nudge stupidity.
Have to agree on this one. If my 9-year old daughter came asking what Spidey's joke meant, I would have been pissed. She and my wife have already had "the talk" and Cora is a smart kid, but I'd like to leave things like oral sex off the discussion table for now.
Joe Kelly was great on Deadpool, but increasingly I think his problem is that he writes *every* book as if it was Deadpool....
Now, I KNOW that the "original" version of this joke IS intended as a "how to have the perfect woman - short enough for the b.j. with a place on her head for my drink", BUT I didn't take it as that for the context of this Spidey-joke.
Look; unless you ALREADY KNOW the original joke, you're NOT going to see this as an oral sex joke.
ALL that seems to be implied is; Hammerhead will make the perfect drink-table for a giant.
And the "wait til your older kiddies" comment is because; duh... kids can't drink (legally) until age 21.
The only vague (and really confusion-inducing) part for kids is the emphasized "...REALLY happy".
THAT one word (REALLY) should have been edited out.
The rest was fine.
Dumb. But fine.
~P~
PTOR
PTOR-
Two problems. First, even if I were to give full credence to your interpretation, the problem is that the joke as you present it isn't even remotely funny. If you're not already aware of the oral sex joke, you've got a real non-sequitur that isn't in the least amusing.
Secondly, by the logic of your position, could I take the punchline of a racial joke, strip it of its context, and present it in a rated A comic because the kids won't get it? Ethnic or religious jokes? Rehabilitating offensive non-funny jokes really isn't appropriate in a comic book, is it?
Elgigante--even if I grant your argument about the kids--that still eaves the matter of whether such "jokes" are appropriate in a mainstream super-hero comic. I don't need to read Spider-Man questioning Hammerhead's sexual orientation and preference of sexual acts. I don't need to read Superman or Batman belittling a villain's penis size, or Reed Richards suggesting during a battle that Doctor Doom buggers sheep. I can read an adult comic for that, or the joke column in Playboy. There's a proper time and place, and it's not Amazing Spider-Man, and it's not Joe Kelly's sniggering "look at what I got away with" frat boy attempt at "adult" humor.
Let me ask you, Gigante--if one of your students turned in a paper with this joke in it, would you not object, because they've already been innundated with this kind of stuff? If someone did it during a school assembly?
Oh I'd certainly object, but that's because I hold academic writing to a different standard than what appears in pop culture. Comics at the end of the day, when they aren't art (and come on, a big corporate title is rarely, RARELY art) are bits of escapism. They're there to entertain. As much as I appreciate the response here (and really I do appreciate the site because the level of argumentative discourse is a lot higher than a simple "you suck" and a brush-off) the two scenarios aren't comparable. Reading a comic is a private, individual experience. Making an off-color joke in front of a large public audience is not the same as a young reader possibly noticing a joke that will either go over their head or not.
Here's one for all you indignant Spider-Man readers, let's flashback to 2002 when in theaters in front of millions of people of all ages Peter Parker taunts Bonesaw McGraw by remarking "Nice outfit, did your boyfriend make it for you?" Here's Peter Parker (the paragon of good guy who would NEVER make a deal withe the devil :) ) and he's making a fairly homophobic remark in a film that is clearly meant for all ages. The implications of the remark, when you break it down, here are two-fold, one that all gay men dress effeminately and furthermore the possibility that someone being gay is derisive and undesirable (both obviously untrue). If I was a young Spider-Man fan uncertain of my sexuality I'd probably be pretty stung by the exchange. However in the six years since the movie's release I have never heard a single person complain about this line. Why? Who knows? Maybe it has something to do with an unspoken allowance for homophobic humor in mainstream media, or maybe it's because more suggestive humor (regardless of it's success as a joke) is a non-issue to audiences? Or maybe sometime a joke is just that, a joke and not worth getting worked up about? (Maybe I'm completely off-base here, maybe we should be mad that the joke exists in the movie). The fact of the matter is that it was a joke that didn't work for some readers but it's hardly the end of civilization. This slip was the exception it's most certainly not the rule (Bendis' "You stupid cow" line non-withstanding-yeah I know, I may have just killed my argument). Interested to hear your guys take on the whole Bonesaw thing.
elgigante--I have no memory of the line in question, so I'll save detailed discussion until later. But one clear difference is Spider-Man the movie was rated PG-13, which is defined as "PARENTS STRONGLY CAUTIONED--Some Material May Be Inappropriate For Children Under 13," which I think is clearly different than the rating on the particular comic we're arguing about ("appropriate for ages 9 and up"). And while i don't approve of the line as you present it, I think there is at least a degree of difference between "I question your manhood" and "you should be an oral sex slave to a giant."
Thank you for the compliment on the site...but keeping the discourse higher than "a simple 'you suck' and a brushoff" is kind of a re-statement of why I'm not pleased with that Spider-Man story...
On another level, let's not forget the supposed ages of Spider-Man in the 2002 movie and the 2008 comic. The former at the time he made it was still a teenager, still going to high school. I would say that such a juvenile attempt at humor used to taunt an opponent is pretty much in character - a schoolboy making a schoolboy type remark. The Spider-Man in Joe Kelly's story on the other hand is supposed to be in his mid 20s, he is a guy who graduated from college long ago and thus really should have progressed beyond fratboy level jokes.
elgigante: I rolled my eyes at the remark to Macho Man... er, Bonesaw McGraw. I wasn't outraged but I did think it was lame.
For the record, my 9-year old daughter hasn't seen the Spider-Man films.
menshevik: Having worked with many young men in their mid-20s, I can safely say the fratboy humor hasn't always gone away at that point.
The main point is, the writing is lazy, clumsy and grating.
Post a Comment