The Amazing Spider-Man titles

More info on ASM#700:
http://marvel.com/news/story/19262/fan_expo_canada_2012_liveblog_central

Thanks to Marvel.com, we have a few more details about what to expect from this December's Amazing Spider-Man #700. According to writer Dan Slott, each of the issues leading up to the landmark isnstalment will be "a puzzle piece" to the story, with Avenging Spider-Man #15.1 reflecting the events of #700. For those worried that Marvel will kill off Peter Parker, there were seemingly no assurances made that that won't be happening, but "2013's gonna be a big year for Spider-Man," Axel Alonso told those in attendance. Worryingly, there was more talk of fans hating Dan Slott once they've read the issue, and it was revealed that the events of the issue will reflect why exactly he's sporting a new costume in Joe Quesada's Marvel NOW! promo image. It was also announced that this January will see the release of Morbius: The Living Vampire, a new ongoing series coming out in January written by Joe Keatinge and with art by Rich Elson.

webhead2006 wrote:More info on ASM#700:

This is a cover?

...

Okay, look, I know that for years now, a lot of magazines and other publications have taken to use website-style layouts and colors and shit. It's been happening for at least a decade, right? But this... I mean, is there really a point in having names printed on the cover like blog tags? (A) It looks amateurish as fuck and (B) the suggestion is that the names in larger print are of greater importance than the smaller names. Example? Mark Bagley and Todd McFarlane are printed in a fairly similar size. But does ANYbody REALLY think their contributions to the character are the slightest bit comparable?

I mean, yeah, McFarlane updated and modernized the character models. The characters, having been stuck in the Romita, Sr model for years, desperately needed it. I'll give him that.

Meanwhile, Bagley spent, what was it, ten years on Ultimate Spider-Man alone? To my understanding, Bendis writes by coming up with four or five pages of dialogue and letting his penciller deal with everything else (plot, characters, character designs, pacing, the whole burrito). Assuming such was the case for Ultimate Spider-Man (and it was as far as I know), that means Bagley contributed more to Spider-Man and his mythos in 2004 than McFarlane did in the entirety of his run on the character. And this is not to speak of the fact that Bagley designed the Ben Reilly Spider-Man costume or of McFarlane's handicaps, such as his training wheels as a writer on the adjectiveless Spider-Man book Marvel gave him. True, McFarlane is a rock star to this very day because of his Spider-Man work. Fine, whatever, but the fact of the matter is that on his best day he's not fit to lick the dirt off Bagley's boots when it comes to anything Spider-Man.

Also, I'm not seeing Dan Jurgens' name anywhere on there. Doesn't mean it isn't there, just that I'm not seeing it. Now, Jurgens only stuck around for, what, six or seven or eight issues? During the Clone Saga no less? But (A) ask most people what Sensational Spider-Man is notable for and I guaranfuckingtee they'll say it marks the beginning of Dan's brief run on the character (B) even I'm not fond of his rendering of Spider-Man, it was a big freaking deal when he signed on for the book and (C) that Luke Ross replaced him as penciller is irrelevant trivia to 99% of people out there.

Plus, Dan Jurgens was the guy who pitched the resolution to the motherfucking Clone Saga. Think about that for a minute. Homeboy stuck around for less than a year but he solved a problem that had been kicking editorial's ass for at least a year by that point. True, other people refined and perfected his idea after he'd departed but he was still the guy who proposed the basic concept. And this isn't thecolorsblend talking more of his usual trash; no less an authority than Glenn Greenberg credits Jurgens with the concept. Bottom line? If in some fucking bizarro world Luke Ross somehow deserves a spot on that cover, Dan Jurgens sure as hell does... and, I might add, in larger text.

Anyway. Putting aside the inherent stupidity of this cover concept, it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to use text like that from a contribution standpoint.

Ya I ddont get what's the point with small/large print names. There is probably some sense to it. Though I did read that one is a variant one. Maybe the artist who did like will comment on the style choice in time.

Not Spiderman-related but sorta related, I know that after Spiderman McFarlane had a run on the HULK comic. Unfortunately it was during this time that I quit comics. Again. Anyway, his pencils had that unique style as always but it was also the 'gray Hulk' that he was doing. Would've been interesting to have seen what he could do with the green Hulk but unless I'm mistaken I don't think he hung around that long.