Controversial Spider-Man Opinions

[Frontier]

Stalking your ex when she has a new family gives it a whole new connotation. (Stalking is wrong either way, in case that wasn't clear.)

It just plays into the massive "divorced guy" energy Peter has in this run in particular.

I think "divorced guy" is being generous because that would genuinely make him feel more older and mature than he actually is in this run.

[Kevinroc]

I think "divorced guy" is being generous because that would genuinely make him feel more older and mature than he actually is in this run.

Nah, it makes it look like Peter is having a mid-life crisis. That he's acting more childish to seem younger. Meanwhile he's stalking his ex and her new family.

The whole thing just screams "wow, Peter's old."

Maybe if they hadn't given MJ a family and instead gave her a puppy it would read differently. But they gave her kids (even if they turned out to not be real).

[Frontier]

Nah, it makes it look like Peter is having a mid-life crisis. That he's acting more childish to seem younger. Meanwhile he's stalking his ex and her new family.

The whole thing just screams "wow, Peter's old."

Maybe if they hadn't given MJ a family and instead gave her a puppy it would read differently. But they gave her kids (even if they turned out to not be real).

In hindsight they might have been better off just having Peter and MJ take care of the kids together and deal with the fallout of them vanishing.

[Kevinroc]

In hindsight they might have been better off just having Peter and MJ take care of the kids together and deal with the fallout of them vanishing.

Wells didn't want to write Peter x MJ. He wanted them broken up. And the idea he went with was "MJ has kids with another man."

This isn't like giving Liz or Betty kids. MJ is more closely associated with Peter than they are. So if MJ has kids and feels older, then Peter is going to feel older as well.

And if Peter is stalking MJ while she is with her new family, then Peter is REALLY going to feel older. Massive "divorced guy" energy fully on display.

The whole thing was poorly planned from top to bottom.

[Vegeta]

Peter should have kept the symbiote costume. That's my controversial opinion.

[hbomb450]

controversial opinion: I don't understand the hate for the editorially mandated decision to undo the Peter/MJ marriage when it was an editorially mandated decision to marry them to begin with, not a natural progression of each character's development

[wleakr]

controversial opinion: I don't understand the hate for the editorially mandated decision to undo the Peter/MJ marriage when it was an editorially mandated decision to marry them to begin with, not a natural progression of each character's development

You know...that's a dang GOOD controversial opinion!

[phonogram12]

controversial opinion: I don't understand the hate for the editorially mandated decision to undo the Peter/MJ marriage when it was an editorially mandated decision to marry them to begin with, not a natural progression of each character's development

As someone who can honestly go either way on the marriage, I entirely see your point.

[Kevinroc]

controversial opinion: I don't understand the hate for the editorially mandated decision to undo the Peter/MJ marriage when it was an editorially mandated decision to marry them to begin with, not a natural progression of each character's development

Them getting together was absolutely a natural direction for the characters, even though the wedding itself was rushed. It's funny because the people who didn't think they would work like Roger Stern and Jim Owsley (later Christopher Priest) wrote scenes that very much made Peter x MJ the natural direction for the characters.

But writers unintentionally making Peter x MJ inevitable despite not wanting it to be begins with Stan Lee. And that is the funniest thing of all.

[godisawesome]

There's definitely an element of OMD backlash that is strictly story specific rather than about editorial's dream for the character either way - notice how much less controversial stuff like the "death" of MJ, her leaving Peter afterwards, and even the Clone Saga don't touch OMD's infamy. Bad writing in execution from JMS/Quesada (since there's dispute about how much actual agency the former had in the situation) has likely poisoned audience opinion on an editorial decision that just might not have much power without it.

Here's a fairly new one:

MCU Spider-Man is a lot more faithful to the character and franchise in some ways than the Raimi films, and as an addendum to that, the Iron Man Jr. is really only an annoyance for some rather than an active liability in how "faithful" the character is.

Some of this is how the franchise and characters evolved - Lee and Ditko started an evolution in comics that eventually outpaced their own work, and stuff like Ultimate Spider-Man has permanently changed the franchise as well. The "platonic ideal" of Spider-Man grows with the times, and his hardscrabble existence matters much less than it once did compared to him growing as a character, having a believable psychology, and struggling with more believable problems for his context. The MCU may have give it's Peter a leg up in terms of material and social support, but it was also MORE careful and dedicated to investing in his struggles and facing him with well thought-out problems than the Raimi films, which eventually succumbed to how the retro-nature Raimi loved was running out of gas.

The Raimi films were deliberately retro, with an intentional campy side; the MCU films are deliberately modern, avoid camp, and tend towards much less melodrama.

OG comic Spider-Man was never meant to be campy; In that respect, the MCU Spider-Man is more faithful, and as time wore on, Raimi's approach became more artificial and manufactured compared to the MCU, in spite of the MCU's more overtly fantastical nature.

This also reflects in how the characters are written - Raimi's MJ is a little bit regressive as an archetype from what she was introduced as and became in the comics, so while both she and the MCU MJ are mostly completely overhauled, MCU MJ *is* closer to the original spirit because she's less a plot device or archetype and unlike the Raimi version doesn't become MORE of a plot device, and similarly the characters around Peter become more cartoonish in the Raimi films and actually remain more "normal" in the MCU films.

MCU Peter himself also, somewhat relevant to modern comic discussion, is less "cosmic punching bag the writer must torture to ensure fidelity" and more "an experiment in growing a character organically through life's trial and tribulations" - again, closer to the goal and intent of Lee and Ditko than what Raimi or modern Spidey editorial want.

[TinkerSpider]

controversial opinion: I don't understand the hate for the editorially mandated decision to undo the Peter/MJ marriage when it was an editorially mandated decision to marry them to begin with, not a natural progression of each character's development

1) It actually was a progression - both Peter and MJ were thinking of each other in terms of long term commitment - and there was organic motivation provided in the arc leading up to the marriage. That’s wholly different to “the devil made me do it.” As it is, OMD remains incomplete because the story promises the characters will eventually defeat the devil and yet - they still haven’t. I’m convinced one of the reasons why OMD is disliked by nearly every reader, regardless of their feelings about the marriage, is because it offends our innate story sense. Humans are Wired for Story - I suggest reading Lisa Cron’s book of the same title - and we instinctively know when something violates our understanding of how stories function. This is also why I guess my somewhat controversial opinion is that OMD will never stop being a problem, will never stop being a character and story breaking event, and will never stop coming up when asked for the worst arcs in comics - because it so violates the contract between storyteller and audience.

2) even if this were true, two wrongs do not make a right.

[Mister Mets]

controversial opinion: I don't understand the hate for the editorially mandated decision to undo the Peter/MJ marriage when it was an editorially mandated decision to marry them to begin with, not a natural progression of each character's development

I think fans of the marriage don't want to think about that.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

Again, it is a myth that the marriage was an editorial mandate.

I posted the link here at least twice. Fans asked Stan and Shooter at a Con if they will marry Peter and MJ, the rest of the audience cheered, and Marvel got the idea from there.

So the idea came from the bottom-up. It was Marvel answering to fan demand - total opposite of OMD.

[Lifetap]

I also think the 'divorced guy' energy is intended by the story. From what has been said about the plan and the letter pages the plan seemed to be going in 'they want to be together but life is keeping them apart' that is basically a story of Peter wanting to be with MJ but being unable to because she moved on. What they haven't really done is show that MJ still cares about Peter as well, so the story reads (to me at least) of a bitter ex unable to accept that their ex has moved on, rather than what they said they were going for.

[Jman27]

I mean isnt OMD basically a convoluted divorce