Amazing Spider-Man Annual #1
Tuesday, November 4th, 2008
Ever since last year’s “Swing Shift” special, the mystery of who “Jackpot” was has been percolating through the Spider-man series. Unfortunately for the annual that finally wraps the storyline up, it’s not been percolating very well. Sure, there’s been the odd hint here and there, but the assumption largely foisted on readers has been that Jackpot is, somehow, connected to Mary-Jane, and that the story’s going to tie in to her.
Well, apparently not. After severely underselling the mystery in the main spider-title, it falls to Marc Guggenheim to lay out the pieces of the puzzle for those that still care. As a story, it hangs together fine, and all the plot elements make sense. Undoubtedly, it’s a coherent read. Unfortunately, it’s not a satisfying one. If the specific elements of this story had been drawn out over even a few issues, it would’ve given readers time to come up with their own theories. As it is, the two we do have - Jackpot’s “real” name and Sara’s fondness for MJ - are so old that it’s easy to forget that they even tie in to this story.
By revealing so many of the facts in the space of one issue, any chance for readers to connect the dots themselves is utterly gone, and the tale feels like little more than exposition as a result. Jackpot’s true identity was destined to be a controversial matter, whether it was or wasn’t MJ - but somehow, the final revelation manages to evoke no strong feelings at all. Reading the story, my main feeling is that Jackpot represents the worst sort of wasted opportunity. The character who should’ve been a supportive heroine and a decent addition to Spider-Man’s universe, whether she was MJ or not, is instead written out with nary an epilogue. Readers of the main title - where, let’s not forget, she’s appeared fairly prominently - might just as soon fail to notice that she’s gone at all. Even the cliffhanger, which suggests the return of Ehret, seems like a cop-out, replacing a now-familiar, slightly developed character with an unfamiliar and undeveloped one in an attempt to both have the cake and eat it.
There’s no doubt that this annual is a must-read for those following Amazing Spider-Man. Art and writing are completely competent. But if it’s a satisfying resolution to a long-running story you’re after, though, then you should probably lower your expectations before reading it.
In a rare display of restraint, Jeph “I ruined Ultimates” Loeb actually manages to squeeze a half-decent story out of this annual. It’s not without its flaws, and there’s an utter laundry list of questions you could ask about why, exactly, this tiny continuity gap needed filling at all, but at least it didn’t feel as though it was insulting me as a reader. A definite step up.
Brian Michael Bendis gets it. He gets how to tell fresh, entertaining Spider-Man stories, of course - he’s been doing it consistently for eight years now. But he also gets what an annual should be - an entirely standalone story, rooted in the main title’s themes and overall continuity but without necessarily being sequential to the ongoing story; and it should also feel a bit special in some way, like it’s doing something important either story-wise or thematically. This was achieved in superb fashion with the first of the USM annuals - still one of the absolute best issues of the title - which set off the Peter/Kitty Pryde relationship, and although the second one disappointed a bit in comparison, this one feels like much more of a “sequel”, dealing as it does again with Peter’s love life.
This miniseries has been a real rollercoaster. Something actually happens in this issue, which is good enough in itself, but it’s also something that signifies that all this might actually be coming to some definitive end, for which we can all be thankful. It’s a great moment for Hawkeye/Ronin and it’s nicely muted amidst the chaos for such a powerful development. The problem, though, is that the main feeling I get is relief that the climax appears to be in sight. Is that really what they were going for?
Every Wednesday we take turns to delve into our trusty longboxes, pluck out a dusty back issue, and give you our thoughts. We’ll also try and place it in the context of the time it was originally published.





