|Amazing Spider-Man Message Board >> View Post|
Subj: Re: Carnage without Carnage
Posted: Sun Oct 24, 2010 at 07:37:55 pm EDT (Viewed 207 times)
Reply Subj: Re: Carnage without Carnage
Posted: Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 08:14:44 am EDT (Viewed 171 times)
> > What's weird, and kind of sad, is how the writer talked about keeping Kasady dead out of "respect" for Bendis' New Avengers work where he was killed, despite the fact that Bendis himself was smart enough to realise Marvel would want Kasady back one day, and later state it was unknown if he was in the symbiote when the Sentry tore it up.
> Bendis also clearly didn't know anything about Carnage at the time, believing he had the same life-absorbing powers he had in the animated show (which he had, of course, because you can't have a rampaging serial killer on a kids' show).
Yeah, that was weird. Didn't he give the waste of paper that was Ultimate Carnage abilities like that, too?
I suppose you could write off the New Avengers issue as Cage and Veranke having no idea what Carnage's powers were, and him just going with their confusion and talking about how he'll life-drain them, for laughs.
> > But this is the problem: People who like Carnage don't want to read about Carnage that isn't Kasady, and people who don't like Carnage aren't likely to be won over by a new Carnage.
> I think this is a mistake writers often make with the symbiotes. Throughout this decade, writers have continued to believe that Venom was the name of the alien symbiote Eddie Brock wears (or wore), not understanding that Venom is the specific combination of Eddie Brock and that particular symbiote. Consequently, you have books like that terrible Venom series, written by Daniel Way, in which Venom didn't even appear until the very last arc. (It wasn't even really his symbiote!)
I really have no idea what they were thinking with that Venom series, at all. I can see why we ended up with Gargan as the new Venom, out of the fact that poor Eddie has been so inconsistently characterised, is he a deluded maniac who feigns crocodile-tears with the lives he takes in pursuit of his insane vendetta, or is he a genuine "lethal protector" heroic vigilante who just really hates Spider-Man? Did the symbiote corrupt him, or did he corrupt it? What they did resulted in us getting Eddie back as the "lethal protector" again, while we had a crazier than ever Venom. But it couldn't and can't last, because everyone knows Venom = Eddie Brock.
> Likewise, Carnage is Cletus Kasady plus a specific alien symbiote.
While history is clearly on the side of this argument, and outside of Gargan-as-Venom, or the five minutes that Ben Reilly was "Spider-Carnage", you won't find anyone at all arguing in support of the times they've put people other than Brock and Kasady in the symbiotes, it's weirdly like the people who don't like Carnage and are never going to, are calling the shots and dictating What Fandom Wants regarding the character. Given that the only thing that would satisfy the haters is "never use Carnage at all", when Marvel are doing a Carnage comic, why the H*ll can't they do the right thing for the fans, and use Kasady?
> (Of course, it's not really a particular one anymore, because Venom absorbed it and Carnage got a new one in the Negative Zone and . . . and this is why we try to forget the Mackie run.)
While the Venom vs Carnage miniseries had one other glaring continuity error, I'm fully in support of going with it's notion that Kasady just...has his original symbiote back and we just don't question it, especially since Maximum Carnage made it perfectly clear that you can't kill the symbiote without killing Kasady, nor separate it from him. Let's say that Eddie just...uh...injured it, and it couldn't re-form for a while, and it eventually just ate the spare symbiote Kasady found.
> If anything, I'd say Cletus Kasady is more essential to Carnage than the symbiote. That the alien has absorbed a good deal of Kasady's inborn bloodlust is compelling (and we've seen that it has, in stories when the symbiote has taken over Spider-Man and the Silver Surfer, respectively), but the character traits that make Carnage Carnage come from Kasady.
Really, to argue otherwise would be like saying that because you could put some other random character in the Iron Man armour, Tony Stark is utterly expendable to the concept of Iron Man. And yet I'm seeing more than a few reviewers online genuinely talking as if "symbiote without Kasady" is a far more interesting and entertaining prospect. I blame the anti-1990s bias inherent in almost all comics reviews online.