Comments on: Can We Ignore Characters’ Origins?

By: crusher machine

crusher machine — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 16:12:20 +0000

Usually I do not read post on blogs, but I would like to say that this write-up very compelled me to check out and do it! Your writing style has been amazed me. Thank you, quite great post.

By: Julian LB

Julian LB — Tue, 20 Sep 2011 06:20:14 +0000

I suppose in a way it comes down to being a fairy tale or a science fiction story, in a fairy tale we start with very little indication of character and just enough backstory to kick off: “This is the situation, and here’s what this person does”. It’s simple, but it means that the reader lends themselves into the story to fill the gaps, as opposed to “Let me tell you about the socio-political climate that led up to the story and how this person became involved in it”. If this is the first issue, intended for new readers to take off with this new character, why not lets just see this guy in action and have some fun?

By: Thinking Monkey

Thinking Monkey — Mon, 19 Sep 2011 12:42:59 +0000

Age isn’t really an issue. Origins, or rather explanations, are more of an issue. Just look at the DCnU or Spiderman One More Day to Brand New Day. People wanted to know how we got from point A to point B. I remember reading a lot of posts going on about a potential new spiderman going on about how that would even be possible. Well, as of this issue, we know. Had there been no origin, the opposite question would be headlining this article, and the conversation would flow from there.

By: M.

M. — Mon, 19 Sep 2011 10:24:23 +0000

Power Pack, Franklin Richards, Impulse, Wally West’s kids were all underaged, too.

Thirteen is Thirty in comic book world.

By: Kev

Kev — Sun, 18 Sep 2011 15:16:12 +0000

“And a 13-year-old is too young to be a superhero anyway.”

Dick and Damian both started around 10 years old

By: Rolando Garcia

Rolando Garcia — Sat, 17 Sep 2011 18:32:55 +0000

I really agree with this article. I felt the same way. Maybe even more let down.

By: richard

richard — Sat, 17 Sep 2011 03:13:15 +0000

really it can work either way,its up to the writer to make us care.

By: Steven R. Stahl

Steven R. Stahl — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 20:50:31 +0000

What’s wrong with coincidences?

When there are several, and/or an unlikely combination of them, the entire story becomes unbelievable. And a 13-year-old is too young to be a superhero anyway.

And isn’t it more important what the person does with their powers or training or what have you than seeing the accident or circumstances that led to them?

That’s true for an action/adventure story or a mystery: hook the reader’s interest by setting up an interesting situation immediately. In comics, unless some sort of explanations are provided for motives and abilities, the initial situation might not make any sense, especially to a new reader.

SRS

By: Rajan

Rajan — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 20:15:45 +0000

I think we’re completely past the point where we need to start superhero stories with origins, whether those stories are told in comics or in movies or wherever. As a writer, we’re constantly told to start stories as late as possible, or as close to the action, and I think, especially when introducing new heroes, that it’s much more effective to start with the action and then go back and fill in the backstory once the character is established. In my mind, we should care about them enough first to want to know the backstory. Because usually the backstory is not as interesting as what happens later. And isn’t it more important what the person does with their powers or training or what have you than seeing the accident or circumstances that led to them? Starting with the origin, in this day and age, just seems amateurish to me from a storytelling standpoint.

By: Kyle Garret

Kyle Garret — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 20:08:21 +0000

Yeah, the coincidences kind of kicked me out of the story, even if the art was beautiful.

I honestly thought they’d open with Mary Jane trying to figure out who the new Spider-man is, and split the story between Miles trying to be Spider-man and MJ tracking him down. We could get bits and pieces of his origin along the way.

I don’t know. Seemed like a more interesting way to tell it.

By: K-Box

K-Box — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 19:39:18 +0000

I don’t think every superhero needs an explicitly spelled-out origin story so much as they need an extremely well-defined motivation, which is why even superhero stories that are all about their origins often fail to hit the mark — see also: Hal Jordan coming across as an utterly formulaic paint-by-numbers Joseph Campbell “Heroes’ Journey” archetype in the Green Lantern movie. The Dark Knight didn’t need to give Heath Ledger’s Joker an origin (or at least, not a reliably narrated one), because his motives for doing what he did came through in every action he undertook. For a hero, you don’t need to go back to their childhoods or when they lost their loved ones to show the audience why they’re willing to risk their lives as heroes. And what’s unfortunate is that Bendis himself comes so close to capturing this style of characterization in this issue, when we see Miles’ reaction to his own good fortune versus the bad fortune of others. You almost could have flash-forwarded straight from that scene into him already being in costume, because it shows us that he has the EMPATHY needed to become a hero.

By: Ben

Ben — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 19:23:07 +0000

What’s wrong with coincidences? This is a story about what would happen if all those events happened. I don’t see the problem. If all those things didn’t HAPPEN to occur, there’d be no Spider-Man (and thus no story) or Spider-Man would be someone else (and you’d be reading about him/her instead and complaining about those new coincidences).

By: Brian

Brian — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 19:14:41 +0000

I’m a fan of the personal stories. More of a root for Peter Parker, not Spider-Man sort of guy. So I liked the lack of heroics this early.

One thing I did like about focusing on Miles first was that Bendis showed his concern for others (at the lottery). It’s one of those “He was selfless, even before he had powers” things. I liked it.

By: Henchman4Hire

Henchman4Hire — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 19:00:47 +0000

Oh wow! That was the Prowler? I thought it was some variation on Deadpool. But you’re right, that’s totally the Prowler. Awesome! I love the Prowler! It’s about time we had an Ultimate Prowler.

And I agree with you. It would have been a lot more fun to actually read about Spider-Man as opposed to Miles. He was a cool kid in the issue, and it’s good to focus on his character…but Bendis could have done that with him already being Spider-Man.

Still, I didn’t mind the slow burn too much. I’m more than willing to give Bendis time to create.

By: Simon DelMonte

Simon DelMonte — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 18:48:05 +0000

We’re not really getting origin stories in a lot of the new 52. And some of those seem to be working. OK, it’s not like we really need an origin story for some heroes, or Frankenstein, but it’s fun to be dropped in with things at a boil.

By: Steven R. Stahl

Steven R. Stahl — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 18:05:46 +0000

I suppose the origin, like origins generally, will provide Morales with the motivation to be a hero. Otherwise, being a hero isn’t a rational decision.

The issue allowed Bendis to write a bunch of fairly good scenes about Morales and his family. The rest — the rest was a disaster. Bendis doesn’t know enough about genes to write about them intelligently. Morales’s origin was less realistic — in that the details made no sense — than Peter Parker’s origin was. Bendis also managed to misrepresent the Arachne myth. And the coincidences. . .

This is a series that deserves to fail, not because Morales is, in isolation, a bad character, but because of the writer’s sheer ineptitude.

SRS