Trouble #1

[chrisco37]

Did anyone read it? Did you find the last line on the verge of sacrilege, or did you find it an amusing joke?

 

Absolutely horrible garbage!

 

Chris

 

 

[Ares]

Did anyone read it? Did you find the last line on the verge of sacrilege, or did you find it an amusing joke?

 

Absolutely horrible garbage!

 

Chris

 

 

what was the last line?

[chrisco37]

I didn't read the entire issue, just flipped, so I don't know what the characters names are.....anyway, at the end, two of the young lovers are rolling around in the sack. In the final panel, the girl (she looks like Mary Jane) is sitting on the bed holding a packaged condom and says, "Face it tiger, you just hit the jackpot!"

 

GROAN!

 

Chris

[Zonker]

I didn't read the entire issue, just flipped, so I don't know what the characters names are.....

Chris

 

Chris, it gets worse... Marvel has let it be known that the two couples "might be" Ben & May Parker(as in Peter's Uncle & Aunt), and his parents (sorry, not enough of a Spidey fan to know their names). So Petey apparently married a girl just like dear ol' Mom after all?

 

 

[chrisco37]

Yeah, I remember us talking about that. I know the "players" are Ben & May, and Richard & Mary.....just didn't know who was who......this is really starting to reek of 90's speculation fodder.....OMG, I think JC might be right afterall!!!!!

 

Chris

[valiantman]

Marvel has let it be known that the two couples "might be" Ben & May Parker(as in Peter's Uncle & Aunt), and his parents

 

Am I missing something here?

If Peter Parker was 16 (or so) in 1961, wouldn't this story need to

take place in 1945 (or earlier) to even make these two couples "possibly them"?

 

Sorry, I haven't read this book...

The cover looked like "Romy & Michele's High School Reunion".

What's the year in the story?

[Zonker]

Am I missing something here?

If Peter Parker was 16 (or so) in 1961, wouldn't this story need to

take place in 1945 (or earlier) to even make these two couples "possibly them"?

 

You're joking, yes? This is comic book time we're talking about. If Parker were really 16 in 1963 (FF #1 was '61, not AF#15), then he'd be 56 today, right? Oh, wait, I forgot, it's his clone we're reading about today, so maybe the clone doesn't age like the rest of us, and the cosmic rays kept the FF forever young-ish, and...

[FlyingDonut]

Don't forget that Ben Grimm was a fighter pilot in WW2. The youngest he could be then would be about 77, assuming that he was born no later than 1926 (making him 19 as a fighter pilot in 1945, which would be possible). Reed Richards worked for the OSS in the war, which had an age requirement of at least 21, so the youngest HE could be would be 80, assuming he was born no later than 1923.

 

Funny thing is, they were "old" in 1961 then. Ben would have been 35, Reed 38. You notice that in subsequent reprintings of FF 1 the WW2 references were cut out!

[Ares]

Marvel has let it be known that the two couples "might be" Ben & May Parker(as in Peter's Uncle & Aunt), and his parents

 

Am I missing something here?

If Peter Parker was 16 (or so) in 1961, wouldn't this story need to

take place in 1945 (or earlier) to even make these two couples "possibly them"?

 

Sorry, I haven't read this book...

The cover looked like "Romy & Michele's High School Reunion".

What's the year in the story?

 

its probably Ulitimate Parents

[valiantman]

You're joking, yes? This is comic book time we're talking about.

Yeah, I was joking. Who would think that comics would follow actual time?

 

I guess I've read a few too many Valiants. Crazy real-time continuity fanatics.

 

Actually, I've got no problem with popular characters "not aging"...

but this is the "origin" we're talking about. People get to age in their origins.

Baby Kal-El becomes Superman. Little Bruce Wayne sees parents murdered.

Why wouldn't "little Peter Parker" be a 1950's kid?

Why wouldn't his parents be a 1940's couple?

[delekkerste]

What's the year in the story?

 

Given the cultural references in the story, it is *at least* the summer of 1978 with the "Hillside Strangler" comment and the reference to multiple "Emmanuelle" movies. And, given the difficulty that Ben encounters using his fake ID, it would argue strongly for the summer of 1980 (the year the drinking age was raised to 21).

 

So, even if May was 20 in 1978 (and it looks more like she's supposed to be between 15 and 17 in the story), that would make her a maximum of only 45 today while Peter, if born in 1979, would only be 24. The continuity's all screwed up...I know comic characters age at different rates, but Aunt May was never portrayed even close to 45 in the comics and Peter's aged to 29 or so from what I've read in interviews with creators.

 

As for the book itself, it is a total travesty...who knew Aunt May was actually an exhibitionist nympho from Brooklyn? And if it isn't "really" Aunt May, Ben Parker, etc., then what's the point of this series? That said, I may just be morbidly curious enough to see what other crimes against creativity Marvel can perpetrate with this series, so I'll probably pick up the rest of the series...just like Bill Jemas knew I would.

 

Gene

[supapimp]

hey come on now, they we're young once too you know....maybe it's kinda like hearing your parents have sex for the first time? i know, you don't want to go there!

[delekkerste]

hey come on now, they we're young once too you know....maybe it's kinda like hearing your parents have sex for the first time?

 

Ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwww...

 

By the way, my local comic shop had a little sign next to the issue that read: "BUY THIS BOOK! SEE AUNT MAY NAKED!!" Is it any wonder it was flying off the shelves as fast as it was?!!

 

Gene

[Darthdiesel]

"BUY THIS BOOK! SEE AUNT MAY NAKED!!"

 

That'd be a selling point even in the regular continuity of ASM!

[plitch]

"BUY THIS BOOK! SEE AUNT MAY NAKED!!"

 

That'd be a selling point even in the regular continuity of ASM!

 

That was so wrong!

 

Hey Darth, you either have an eBay stalker or you just got yourself another fancy new eBay handle.

Darthnipple

 

[delekkerste]

Did anyone read it? Did you find the last line on the verge of sacrilege, or did you find it an amusing joke?

 

I just read issue #2. Truly one of the worst comics I have ever read in my life. And yet, it's like watching a train wreck in progress - I can't help but look (or read, in this case). Seems that a lot of people are only too happy to avoid this title though - my local shop has a ton of unsold #1s left.

 

Face it Tiger - you've always wanted to see Aunt May naked!

 

Gene

[Darthdiesel]

Face it Tiger - you've always wanted to see Aunt May naked!

 

 

Oh how true...in all her saggy, wrinkled glory, Mean Gene

[chrisco37]

I just read issue #2. Truly one of the worst comics I have ever read in my life.

 

I didn't even bother to pick up #2. But now the question becomes, Which book is worse? Marville or Trouble?

 

 

 

Chris

[Lantern]

Which Book Sucks More? Marville or Trouble

 

I prefer to say that one sucks and the other one blows.

 

 

[sborock]

I just read issue #2. Truly one of the worst comics I have ever read in my life.

 

I didn't even bother to pick up #2. But now the question becomes, Which book is worse? Marville or Trouble?

 

<FORM METHOD=POST ACTION="http://boards.collectors-society.com/dopoll.php"><INPUT TYPE=HIDDEN NAME="pollname" VALUE="1060878867chrisco37">

<p>Which Book Sucks More?

<input type="radio" name="option" value="1" />Marville

<input type="radio" name="option" value="2" />Trouble

<INPUT TYPE=Submit NAME=Submit VALUE="Submit vote" class="buttons"></form>

 

Chris

 

Both were not worth my picking up the 2nd issue, the 1st issues could be the worst comics I have ever read, and I read 75 comics a month! The only thing that MIGHT be worse is if they made a comic adaptation of the Ben and Jlo movie Gigli........