Spider-Man 2000 Annual

So, I didn't have anything to read last weekend. I stopped into my local comics shop and scanned the racks. The cover to Amazing Spider-Man 2000 stood right out and spoke to me.

The stark black background contrasted with the unusual sight of Spider-Man laying, apparently wounded or dead, among dozens or hundreds of headless Spider-Man action figures.

Having been disappointed by every Spider-Man comic book I've purchased since (and including) Spider-Man #75 (wherein Ben Reilly was artlessly killed in a meta-comment on the reader reaction to the Clone Saga), I was extremely wary. Time and time again, the editors and creators of the Spider-Man titles have shown they have no understanding of what makes the character work, no ability to get out of the sinkhole the character has been stuck since before the Clone Saga, and a criminal disregard for the classic work of Steve Ditko, Stan Lee, Gil Kane and others.

I had looked forward to Spider-Man Chapter One with cautious optimism. Creator John Byrne had disappointed in his work for DC he had done in the couple of years leading up to his return to Marvel, but he had had varying degrees of success in his overhauls of Superman and the Fantastic Four, and there was no reason to believe his interpretation of Spider-Man would be any worse than the previous (lack of) direction the character had been taken in.

Wrong. Byrne's Chapter One was an insulting attempt at solving continuity problems that didn't exist, essentially a chance for Byrne to exercise his ego (as typified by his egocentric editorial in the first issue of Chapter One).

It turned out the relaunch of the Spider-titles at that time was an "Illusion of Change" shell game that would have made Stan Lee proud, had it not shat upon one of his greatest creations. There was no real change in direction, the editorial team remained intact and "writer" Howard Mackie, a man with no apparent aptitude for writing Spider-Man, was kept on despite his disastrously unfocused storylines leading up to the relaunch #1 issues.

So, despite a lifelong love of Spider-Man going back to the first comics I ever encountered in 1972, I bailed.

Over the last couple of years, I've checked in occasionally, to see if things had gotten any better. It has boggled my mind again and again that the man responsible for co-plotting and drawing the original Days of Future Past X-Men storyline is so completely incapable of creating anything at all worth reading. But John Byrne's Spider-Man run has been at best dull, and at worst, as I said, criminally insulting to the readers, to the characters, and to the giants upon whose shoulders Byrne and his co-conspirators so gleefully urinate.

So, I picked up this Spider-Man 2000 annual, hoping maybe this time it would be different. Maybe, I thought, maybe the snake won't bite me.

Boy, does Spider-Man 2000 ever bite. "Writer" Howard Mackie concocts a tale of the Scriers (holdovers from the oh, so successful Clone days), and a rogue member of their never-explained organization creating a Harry Osborn avatar that assists Spider-Man in foiling the Scrier plot.

Along the way we're treated to some of the worst art to appear in a Spider-Man comic in some time, courtesy of artist Klaus Janson.

I've been nothing but critical of the Spider-Man stories of the last few years, but I'll be the first to admit John Byrne and John Romita, Jr. both draw Spidey well. I think Romita has gone a little overboard in developing his blocky style, but he still can tell a story better than many "superstar" artists can. The fact that he is completely unable to draw a woman's face in profile has done nothing to diminish his status among his fans, apparently.

Byrne, too, draws Spidey well enough. Hell, his opening splash page of Spider-Man Chapter One was so well-drawn it almost fooled me into thinking the book was going to be worth reading.

But good artists cannot, in the long run, save poor stories from being seen as what they are. And the writing of these titles over the last few years (possibly by editorial edict) has been atrocious.

Janson's art in this annual is as bad as the story...maybe worse. Frankly, I've never, ever understood why anyone pays Janson to pencil. He was revealed in his stint on Frank Miller's Daredevil as one of the most gifted inkers to ever work in superhero comics. He adds depth, drama and style to almost every penciler he works with.

But when he is doing the penciling himself, his weaknesses stand out in stark contrast to his gifts as an inker. His ability to lay out a page is very weak, his face and figure work are sometimes competent, but more often wonky and unattractive, and overall his work when doing both penciling and inking comes off as amateurish.

I can only assume Janson is still able to get work because of the coattails of his work with Frank Miller two decades ago. His weaknesses as a penciler were apparent to me as early as his first issue on Daredevil without Frank Miller, #192. The difference in styles once Miller stopped contributing layouts was striking, and I would speculate his weaknesses as an artist might have contributed to his departure from Daredevil just a few issues later, halfway through an issue that ended up being finished by another penciler.

Here, in this Spider-Man annual, Janson shows no signs of improvement as a penciler. His backgrounds and cityscapes, as shown on the splash page, are fine--moody, intriguing even. But the figure of Spider-Man on page 3, panel 3 is more indicative of his work as a penciler overall. Lazy. Sloppy. Bad.

I should have known from Mackie's past work that this book would be written poorly. I should have guessed, despite the cover, that Klaus Janson would not be capable of competently illustrating a story all by himself. I should have known the goddamned snake was going to bite me.

But, as I sit here typing, bandage on my snake-bitten shank, I am firm in my resolve. Marvel has finally gotten it through my thick head. I will not buy another Spider-Man comic book until the current editor, writer and artists are completely blown out and replaced with people who have not, time and again, insulted my intelligence, betrayed my memories and just plain ripped me off.

Because Spider-Man 2000 not only bites, it sucks. And at long last, I get the message. Byrne, Mackie, editor Ralph Macchio…they're snakes. They bite.