Damn straight.

Gabe has singled handledly reduced the critic score overall to an 8.5. Take away his reviews, it'll sit closer to 9. There are people on here that only read 9 scores and above. Ludicrous though that may be, he's stopping people from reading this. He clearly doesn't dig the run and yet continues on this path of disdain. As his colleague implies, he is suspect indeed. But we're shills, don't you know?

All you have to do is look at the difference between ASM and USM. One is holding pretty steady in it's readership and scores whereas ASM is tanking in reviews and scores every release. If shilling for a book is reading the things that I actually like and rating it accordingly, then I don't know what being objective is.

Apparently Gabe Hernandez tends to grade things lower than usual is because he likes to compare everything to Watchmen as that's a 10/10. So this comes off as a 6/10. Again, I don't know if it's true. but that's what I heard. What are your thoughts on that reasoning?

Personally I disagree with that. you should judge every book by its own merits and not comparing it to other books. I think The Dark Knight is a personal masterpiece and is the greatest superhero film of all time. But I wouldn't say Avengers 3/4 is a "6/10" because it pales in comparison to TDK. That's just unfair and not correct. We should judge a book based on plot, pacing, art, action, characters, and dialogue. That's my Ted Talk

Basing judgement of one thing on another can be useful but when the two things you are comparing have nothing in common or you are letting your personal biases make criticism that would otherwise not be there, you have a huge problem. Comparing Spider-Man to Watchmen is a waste of time. Comparing most things to Watchmen was a waste of time until whenever Doomsday Clock started because there wasn't really any meaningful comparative story to it.

That's like taking Van Gogh's Starry Night and comparing it to nearly anything in comics. They aren't depicting the same thing. They are both art but they aren't trying to convey the same message. It comes off as disingenuous. It's not giving a fair shake to whatever you are holding it up against because of preconceived ideas that nothing can top whatever you liked previously.

I'm seconding Hex. I think that a lot of Spiderman could be on the same level as Watchmen while doing something very different. By the way, I find the notion that Watchmen or whatever comics really perfected the art form to be really disrespectful and narrow-minded, those are not the only ways to do comics.

Absolutely. Comics that are "perfect" or timeless classics, however you want to frame it, 10/10 comics are not all the same. Even if you used the same measure to compare Batman: Year One and Kingdom Come, two arguably "perfect" series, you're not giving the respect each deserves which is to view them on their own merit. These weren't written with the same ideas in mind. Comics themselves have evolved past a lot of old storytelling conventions and expanded genres not even approached in the 80s.

when i look at the user reviews I see way more people saying Gabe is wrong than actually just doing their own review saying what they like/don't like about it. I also see people discounting what is actually just one person's opinion and for some reason being upset about the book's overall score. The odd thing is that 99.9% of the writers at Marvel & DC care less about scores than everyone here and the worst you get is writers reaching out to discuss a review in a more sensible and respectful way

If you've seen any of my previous reviews, I generally do try to go pretty in depth. I know and likely everyone here knows that creators really don't give two craps about what people have to say here. That doesn't discount those voices here or uplift those on the Weird Science site simply because it makes money and we don't. The creators and the publishers care about sales but when a reviewer is giving unfavorable reviews seemingly to be against the grain for whatever reason that person may have

it can turn off a potential reader for no reason. I'm not saying to be a shill. As I said in my review, I don't support pumping up books for the sake of it but tanking is just as much of a problem. People consuming media generally look to critics more than whatever the average userbase is. They have pull. When the critics reviews don't align with the userbase there is usually a reason. Gabe can have his reasons but that doesn't make them objectively correct. He just comes off as a curmudgeon.

I'm just a guy who likes comics. Like Gabe, I want to see Spider-Man do Spider-Man things. But just because Spider-Man isn't in it beating up the bad guys every issue doesn't discount the book from being good. My opinion is subjective. His is as well. His review is up on this site, people will see it lending itself to criticism. Not everything has to be bombastic and what people have across the board enjoyed about this series is that it takes the small world building moments and highlights them.

Could you explain more how it will ruffle conservatives readers

Hello Daspida. Hope you are well my friend. Did you read it? All of Commander Star's (who is depicted as an antagonist) dialogue is a summation of American Republican rhetoric. Chip is clearly taking a shot at right wingers that espouse the beliefs Star is stating. I'm from Scotland, so I have no horse in the race as it pertains to American politics. I don't mind its inclusion at all. However, I often see comments on here from people who don't believe politics belong in comics.

*I now see you have read it

Few conservatives would be ruffled by this. This is written by someone who has very likely never met one and just believes the boogeyman they created about conservatives on twitter. Left wing bubble. Right wing bubble. It’s all a fraud.

it could have been done with a tiny bit of subtlety - it felt more like a parody which might have been intentional but who knows - Zdarsky isn't a very serious guy overall (and he is Canadian to boot!) I think it will throw people out of the issue no matter what side they are on because it is so obvious who he is trying to upset.

It was so on the nose it made me laugh.

Problem is, like you said, it will likely upset a bunch of fans. The one thing I thought today though is that (and this has nothing to do with my own political stance as I avoid politics for the most part) if zdarsky did the same thing but was "on the nose" about the opposite side of the aisle, he would likely be told he couldn't do it or worse. would have been fired and blacklisted.

Absolutely. To be clear, I'm more left leaning myself. However, there is an absolute double standard at the moment. Particularly in America. The world is becoming so much more 'you can't say this' and 'you can't say that'. If we're really going down that road, you'd think both sides would be held accountable. The balance of that in America is particularly unusual.

I think the idea that there's a leftward bent towards censorship is wild when you look at, well, anything happening in our media. The idea that you just can't say offensive stuff or can't hold certain views is societal gaslighting. Americans just elected the antithesis to this idea. I'm sick of this notion that it's the left that needs to simmer down and be more docile while the right continues to radicalize and become more openly derogatory and bigoted.

I completely agree with you. My point is that no one will be happy unless writers try to be more apolitical. In injecting their own personal beliefs into established characters, they are legitimately impacting their potential reading base.

Having integrity is actually dangerous. Mainstream comics are believed to be a dwindling medium. Leftist writers are totally playing with fire in the current political climate. A lot of right wingers simply cannot handle being called out via comics or media in general. That last season of The Boys contained so much spot on social commentary that the conservatives that once loved the show, turned on it like a bunch of children. The kind of people that believe Homlander 'is right'.

The problem is that art is inherently political. Comics, especially so. There will never *be* an apolitical comic. There was never a time where comics have been apolitical. Superman was a champion of the oppressed, Captain America punched Hitler. Superhero comics specifically could easily turn into strongman, fascist propaganda in an attempt to keep things "apolitical". I'd rather not have that.

The fact that it took the chuds that long to figure out that they were the ones being satirized speaks to their media literacy and overall shouldn't welcome their ideas when most of them just want sexy women, no POC or LGBTQ characters so they can feel comfortable. They don't contribute to the comics medium. Most of them don't even buy or read the comics they rail against. They have people on YouTube or Reddit tell them how to feel. Alienating the people trying to alienating others isn't bad.

Gabe is weird (and Sus) but being one of the few reviewers that isn't a shill and just hands out perfect scores like candy at Halloween doesn't make his reviews "weird" The amount of perfect scores being given out these days is what is weird! Also - Gabe is SUS! Take the guy below - 451 reviews and his average score is a 9.6/10! That means if he gives a book a 9.5/10 it is below average for him! I get that he is a fan (which is awesome) but is that being a critic?

I get what you mean. I hand 10s easily too I guess but thats because I only review things that I liked (unless something annoys me deeply so i feel the need to make a bad review) Even then I think his (Gabe Hernandez) reasonings to give bad reviews are weird. He criticizes dialogue and suporting characters a lot which I don't understand for example. I agree its great to have critics with a more "severe" view tho.

Pumping 10s is just as frustrating as people who tank scores with 1s but I think it's the random inconsistency from Gabe that people have a problem with. He's becoming the Armand White of comics reviews. Everything good is bad, things that are objectively bad aren't seen as poor then every once in a while he throws a curveball and rates a good book fairly. What I don't agree with is to have someone simply to have a harsher view. You don't have to fill that role just to prove a point.

Gabe is sort of a joke. I don't think his reviews are adding anything, because I don't think he's taken seriously.

I agree that both extremes are kind of irrational, but the problem is that Gabe Hernandez reasonings for not liking a comic book aren't fair at least. I read the entire review, and it just comes off as nitpicky. Art is subjective, and there are books that I like but other people don't. It's the same thing other way. But at least make the reasoning more "objective" or "fair" if that makes sense @WeirdSciencejim

everyone's reasoning is their reasoning and different people go into a comic with different backgrounds, likes, pet peeves, etc. It's gabe's opinion and you all seem to check out Gabe's reviews so you know what his reviews are like - the idea that a person thinks it's odd that he takes into account dialogue and side characters is odd in and of itself to me - there are sites that give percentage score to the letterer.

Also, don't discount the fact that there is a site that reviewed this issue that tells their writers they can't go under an 8/10 and if they do, they have to make it up with another review all to keep the free/early review copies. You do notice that as we get further past Wednesday morning, a lot of the overall scores go down a bit. It's also funny that everyone attacks Gabe (which he 100% loves btw) and yet there is a site that pumps out A.I. written reviews each week & gets no flack!

I've always said comic book criticism is terrible as a whole. Gabe's just a rather loud example as to why.

that's your opinion and 100% biased -something i am sure you would accuse Gabe of!

All opinions are biased. There's really no need to defend Gabe here, idk why you've decided to do that now. Comic book critics are a joke, but that doesn't mean we can't laugh at Gabe specifically. You said he likes it anyhow.

why i defend him? He reviews things on my sites! I have always had an open door policy for anyone who wants to write reviews and even if i don't agree with a lot of Gabe's scores, they are his and there are no ads or whatever so there is zero reason to make scores lower or higher . And as far as comic book critics being a joke - a lot are now, but that wasn't always the case - I stopped reviewing books after 3000+ written reviews because you put the effort in and get shit on anyway

and a lot of user reviewers are a joke as well - there are good and bad reviewers in both sections - most people don't give a shit about comic reviews anyway and most sites just gave up doing it because it wasn't worth it to them.

This is just weirdly defensive in a way that you haven't been in the past, from my recollection. I'm basically asking: what's changed? If you put an opinion out there you have to expect a reaction, good or bad. On the other side of things, consumers have to find a critic that most represents them, so that their reviews might actually be a determining factor in whether they ought to consume something. Gabe doesn't seem useful in that regard to me, or to a lot of people here, so we write him off.

this is the first time I've really commented on it! I joke around and call him "Sus Gabe" and on a podcast we do i have a "Sus Gabe's Sus Take of the Week" but when 99.9% of comic reviewers give high scores with little to no reasoning everyone is ok with it - there is even a site that obviously has used AI to write their reviews for months now - and nobody says a word, but because Gabe's score's are lower, he is the guy people crap on.

most people would look at all this as a good thing (like a clickbaity way to drive more traffic to the site) but i never cared about clicks or views, i just like letting people review comics. To be honest, though, the past year or so since Gabe started reviewing stuff, the traffic has gone through the roof so somebody is interested

Hope to see you back on here soon! USM has been fantastic!

Hey man, it's been a long time, how you've been? Life has been crazy(good kind of crazy) this past year so i didn't had a lot of time to be around here but hopefully i'll comeback next year in a more consistent basis. And yeah, USM has been fantastic, my favorite book of the year, it's crazy to me that we have a Spider-Man series being made with such an outstanding level of craftsmanship considering the last few years of ASM.

Been great. Really getting back into reading a bunch myself lately. Helped a lot by this series and the Absolute line. But yeah same stuff here as well, has a lot going on throughout the year. Been a long one but overall good. Glad to hear from you. Missed the reviews! See you around here soon!

maybe comic book standards got lower

They got it free

I have always wondered this. Is this issue as good as Watchmen? As good as the best issue of Sandman? If not, how can it have the same score as those?

Positive reviews pretty much guarantee that they continue to receive issues for free. Consistent criticism if you're a smaller reviewer or don't work for an actual company/site means you might get cut off. I also think that daspidaboy is right. The overall quality has dipped across the board from the big two. While there are still standouts that actually deserve 9s and 10s, objectively, there should really be more middle of the road scores. Not everything needs an 8 or even a 7.

I love Felicia and while 90% of the fan base just wants the Peter and MJ marriage back, I'm not holding out hope for that to happen any time soon. What I would hope for is a longer lasting strong relationship between Peter and Felicia. Romantic or platonic. She's seen him in countless dangerous situations, helped him out of plenty and he's saved her any number of times. They have history, they have a connection that doesn't have to be built on in a romantic way.