Comments on: Spider? Super? A Tale of Two Marriages

By: Bennie

Bennie — Tue, 09 Apr 2013 10:21:24 +0000

I constantly spent my half an hour to read this webpage’s articles all the time along with a cup of coffee.

By: Meh

Meh — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 21:30:11 +0000

@Steve

Indeed , it’s not a case for everyone of boycott or follow the herd .

You can enjoy the current stories , invest in it , and still remind Marvel , if they care to listen (wich i’m sure they do ) , once everywhile , that you are not ok with that particular aspect of the book .

Just because someone enjoyed BND overall doesnt mean he voted against the marriage .

By: Meh

Meh — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 20:02:14 +0000

I love how fans of BND and the newer adventures (of wich i still am) make it sounds as if Peter’s celibate truly changed the content of the featured arcs , as opposed as skilled writers working on the book for a change .

And most of all as if said talented writers wouldnt be all to tell almost the same arcs and stories with MJ as a wife .

Would it change Carlie’s story in say Spider Island to have peter and mj married ? Not really , she would still get powers , help people and kick *ss . So would MJ .

And we could actually have meaningful MJ stories , like we always did , even amidst the worst Spider-man runs … instead of that despicable game of bait and switch .

It seems obvious that including properly MJ is now even more a pain and issue than the Sentry was , and leading to a whole charade of “they are destined to be together , but not now – unless sales drops , not ever with the exception of a non-canon “spiderman we swear its the official end for him and mj” limited series , that will be out of continuity 2 years later ” .

Anyway skip the text above , my point still stands , fans of the wedding or not , Spider-man is better for other reasons completely unrelated .

By: Steve

Steve — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 16:23:44 +0000

@Tuckenie: you spoke my feelings word for word. @J.Dinkhouse: Yes, because we care and would like to vote with our dollars again and get into more of the apparently currently good Spidey stories, yes Tuckenie and I and others do and will continue to “troll.” (It’s what blog participants do here, haven’t you noticed. It only bugs you when you disagree.) Fan reaction can alter editorial mindsets and if those who detest the Spidey-MJ breakup (and naturally, the way it happened) keep the diatribes coming perhaps eventually Marvel will see the light. The end of Spider Island had Pete and MJ together like the old days, if only at the end for a scene, but it showed that it could be feasible for the two of them, despite Mephisto’s machinations, to gradually gravitate back to their natural relationship, which is together as man and wife. (That is if MJ isn’t worried now about all the STDs Pete might have collected along the way while he thought he wasn’t married.) Also, because if you have a devil, you have a God, and the marriage was solemnized before God. In the long run, and at some point in the series, they have to get back together or it’s a case of the devil winning, God losing. And imagine the moment when they decide they have to be together and seal it this time with a wedding (since they forgot the one ever took place). A sterling triumph of true love over evil incarnate. It could be one of the most satisfying payoffs ever. And, as someone who’s bought and read ‘em all since AF#15 (until BND, now I occasional sample a friend’s copy if he recommends it), I never could warm up to Gwen and was glad when she departed the series, some of the most compelling storytelling ever too, by the way. You look at her early appearances and she’s a bitch, up until she becomes infatuated with Peter. Heck, bringing Pete and MJ together would be the perfect time for Mephisto to retaliate by letting Aunt May finally die, perhaps in a way that solidifies Pete’s “power = responsibility” thing even more. No, Tuckenie, let’s you and me and all the other fans who have voted with our dollars, keep “trolling,” as Dink puts it, and never let up. Even if we never get our way, we can at least keep rubbing Quesada/Marvel’s nose in it for years to come. It’s the least we can do and the most they deserve. All 5,000 of you who voted, get on the bandwagon!

By: MarcJ

MarcJ — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 02:48:35 +0000

I think Superman unmarriage just got lost in shuffle of lot others DCnu controversies all happening at same time(Barbara Batgirl ,Sinestro headlining GL,Catwoman & Starfire S** things,etc,etc ,even Superman un-red brief getting more uproar than his marriage)

By: Kyle Garret

Kyle Garret — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 19:02:10 +0000

@Coming Curse
Sure, Final Crisis.

By: Coming Curse

Coming Curse — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 06:08:51 +0000

@Kyle
True, there’s no evidence it was Morrison’s idea, (though it’s not clear that he WASN’T involved in that creative decision in some capacity) The point is Morrison is creatively involved in the reboot, attaching his name to it and essentialy giving it his creative stamp of approval. In the aftermath of OMD, internet fans were threatening to boycott the entire Spider-Man line, if not all of Marvel. For about a year or two after the launch of Brand New Day there was almost constant trolling where people would comment on how horrible BND was, calling it the creative low point of the Spider-Man franchise and insisting that the book had been permanently ruined. Can you really imagine a book with Morrison’s name on it getting that kind of a response from the internet comics community? Or a Perez book for that matter?

By: Kyle

Kyle — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 04:40:09 +0000

@Coming Curse Except DC made the decision. There’s been no evidence that Morrison had anything to do with it. For that matter, the stories he’s currently telling take place at the start of Superman’s career, before he would ever be married. The only person writing stories about a retconned-single Superman is George Perez.

By: Teri

Teri — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 04:16:42 +0000

Forget MJ. Bring back Gwen. Alter history again and bring back Gwen. It should have been her from the beginning.

By: silvanthalas

silvanthalas — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 02:08:39 +0000

“Wow, everyone is such a baby about OMD.”

And Quesada was such a baby about Spidey being married that he contrived OMD.

So what’s your point?

By: Simon DelMonte

Simon DelMonte — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 01:05:42 +0000

I would suggest that there were just not that many good Lois and Clark stories with them married.

Also, we had the not-married L&C in All-Star Superman, and we loved that so much we didn’t miss the marriage.

By: J. Dinkhouse

J. Dinkhouse — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 23:59:40 +0000

Wow, everyone is such a baby about OMD. Its superhero comics, people, and despite Marvel being the more realistic of the two companies, there has always been a fair share of ridiculous $#*! (does anyone remember kid Tony Stark). Besides, if you read the books (if you don’t have a theoligical issue with something that happened in a superhero comic), it seems like they’ll end up back together in the near future. And then I’m sure we’ll get to see pissed-off Mephisto punishing Peter for going back on his Faustian deal. Did OMD suck? Yes, yes it did. Has Amazing Spider-Man been a better book since? Undoubtedly. In fact, it hasn’t been this good since the Seventies.

Oh, and @Fed Up, if you hate all this stuff so much, why do you even bother showing up? Oh, that’s right, you’re a troll. Please crawl back under a bridge where no one has to listen to your bitching.

By: Tuckenie

Tuckenie — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 23:40:01 +0000

It’s because Superman’s was included with a complete continuity wipe that essentially created an alternative universe. The case could be made that this is a completely different Superman and that the Superman who married Lois is still out there, married, living happily ever after. Basically, their story has ended.

With Spider-Man it was made very clear that this is the SAME Peter Parker and that the Devil had the power to go back and undo a vow made before GOD. It just feels incredibly wrong. Plus it was forced against the wishes of a very vocal fanbase, was incredibly un-heroic, was way out of character, and included the allusion that this time they would NEVER be together.

As a Christian, married man I found it offensive both emotionally and spiritually. I have not bought a Spider-Man comic since and will never support this direction in the comic no matter how good it may or may not be.

At least with Superman they didn’t have the gall to imply that the characters would choose this blasphemy.

By: Pyrodafox

Pyrodafox — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 22:06:54 +0000

Superman didn’t make a deal with the devil to save his maternal figure. Spider-Man on the other hand…

By: tralfaz

tralfaz — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 21:20:16 +0000

“I mean, Superman got forcibly divorced from Lois just a few months ago with nary a peep” probably because it was a reboot not some asinine and stupid magic trick like Spider-Man’s and MJ’s separation.

By: Kevin

Kevin — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 20:59:16 +0000

The problem arises in the handling of it: Joe wanted Peter single, had been working on it for years with fans screaming NO!. Tried to get big names to do it. When it is done, it is done has a cheesy plot twist with the characters making poor choices. And the end result is mad storytelling (at the beginning, atleast) and the introduction of the Mary Sue character Carlie, named after joe’s own daughter who was forced down our throats.

With Superman, it was a clean break and the stories have been rich and full.

And finally, Joe made all this noise about Spidey shouldn’t be married…Dan didn’t do that.

By: Molnek

Molnek — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 20:28:20 +0000

I’d say it’s because Superman is being shown as different in this new continuity. His lack of a marriage is a result of his character being changed whereas Spidey’s was just “Oh they still lived together and everything happened the exact same way, they just never actually got married.” Was just stupid.
Plus because Spidey’s was essentially a divorce I’d say we all expect them to not be together again, whereas we all know Superman and Lois Lane will end up with eachother.

By: Zach

Zach — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 20:12:12 +0000

I think Amazing Spidey has been better since OMD, but that’s because they’ve had a talented crew of writers and a renewed sense of fun, not BECAUSE they undid the marriage. All things being equal, I would’ve preferred Spidey stay married, if only because having THE DEVIL USE MAGIC TO ALTER HISTORY shows the “seams” of storytelling and isn’t in-character behavior for Pete and MJ.

By: Sallyp

Sallyp — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 20:05:49 +0000

Odd. I remember there being PLENTY of disgruntlement about the severing of Lois and Clark. Maybe I just read different blogs from everybody else.

By: Aitch Squared

Aitch Squared — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 19:59:13 +0000

Here’s the best take on the Super-Annulment I’ve seen to date: http://mcgone.deviantart.com/#/d491p05

By: Kyle Garret

Kyle Garret — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 19:12:53 +0000

I don’t think that anyone has ever really cared who Clark Kent dates. The same can’t be said of Peter Parker.

I appreciate the renewed focus on the supporting cast in Spider-man these days and a return to the tone of its glory days, but none of that is impossible if he’s still married.

By: Coming Curse

Coming Curse — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 19:12:01 +0000

I think one of the major factors is Grant Morrison’s involvement in the Superman reboot. There’s a segment of fans who are extremely loyal to Morrison and are always willing to defend his work. In contrast, One More Day was engineered by Joe Quesada, who was already a favorite fanboy punching bag at that point.

In effect, it’s fan bias and hypocrisy. When Morrison does it it’s a perfectly legitimate creative choice, but when Quesada does the exact same thing(years earlier) it’s because he must be an incompetent moron who doesn’t understand the basic tenents of storytelling. Or because he’s a fanboy with arrested development who wants to return comics to the way he was when he was a kid. Or because he’s deliberately trolling the fans.. ect.

By: Aaron Poehler

Aaron Poehler — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 18:36:57 +0000

Marvel spectacularly screwed up the handling of the retcon in nearly every imaginable way and caused all their own ongoing troll troubles — it could have been as uneventful as the Supermarriage undoing if they hadn’t blown it so badly.

By: Joshua Adam Hart

Joshua Adam Hart — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 17:57:21 +0000

I think it comes down to the core difference between DC and Marvel. DC heroes are iconic, and Marvel heroes are much more about who’s behind the mask. Spider-Man is Peter Parker, and Peter Parker is a very specific person with a specific history. Messing with that, especially with the whole “deal with the devil” angle, just feels wrong to a Marvel reader. Meanwhile, DC users are used to reboots, and what’s one more Superman reinterpretation as long as the iconic elements are still there?

By: Jake W

Jake W — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 17:48:40 +0000

Because it was a relatively clean reboot compared to OMD.

By: Jane A

Jane A — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 17:40:01 +0000

I think Superman’s marriage sort of got lost in the nu52 hoopla.

By: Steven R. Stahl

Steven R. Stahl — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 17:39:19 +0000

Superman and Lois Lane appear to be virtually inseparable, whether they’re married or not. Marriage just formalizes the eternal romance.

SRS