Is Gwen Stacy is Canon Mary Sue?

[SilverWarriorWolf]

Alright, not sure if this has already been discussed,but I’m putting it here.

I was browsing a website for discussion about canon characters that display Mary Sue traits, and noticed this article here:

Canon Sue: Gwen Stacy

Do you think they are right, and Gwen is a Sue, or are they off by a mile?

[LordUltimus]

Gwen's character is honestly kind of a mess. She was introduced as the Queen Bee of the chemistry department at Peter's university and that her initial interest in Peter was that he was the only guy she couldn't wrap around her finger, due to the fact he was usually to tired from superhero crap to be bothered. After it was decided that Gwen would be the official one true love interest the writers made her more demure and wholesome, which made her boring to the fans, and after her death the sickeningly sweet version of her is the only version remembered.

[Celgress]

Depends on which version we are discussing. Early 616 Gwen could be considered a Mary Sue (as she is shown as being perfect with no flaws), unlike her 65 and Amazing Movies counterparts who are deeper characters with flaws as well as strengths.

[Alan2099]

Early Gwen was outright nasty. They just sweetened her up as time went on.

And then she slept with Green Goblin and had a kid that looked just like Peter Parker and dressed like Snake-Eyes.

[Mike_Murdock]

Mary Sue used to have a very specific meaning that would not apply at all to Gwen Stacy. Now it feels like it's just a term used to describe female characters someone doesn't like. I don't see her as self-insert fan fiction nor as wish fulfillment. I didn't think she started off as a well-developed character, but that doesn't make her a Mary Sue.

[SpiderClops]

She wasn't the main character. She didn't have any powers. She wasn't ultra competent. She died at the hands of a villain. How the hell is this a Mary Sue?

If you wanna talk about how she's always remembered as this oh so sweet perfect girl... that still isn't a Mary Sue.

[WontonGirl]

Mary Sue used to have a very specific meaning that would not apply at all to Gwen Stacy. Now it feels like it's just a term used to describe female characters someone doesn't like. I don't see her as self-insert fan fiction nor as wish fulfillment. I didn't think she started off as a well-developed character, but that doesn't make her a Mary Sue.

I completely agree with this statement. I don't think Gwen Stacy fits the original definition of the word. Or the true definition.

And now, I even see some male characters called "mary sue", lol!

[WebLurker]

Depends on which version we are discussing. Early 616 Gwen could be considered a Mary Sue (as she is shown as being perfect with no flaws), unlike her 65 and Amazing Movies counterparts who are deeper characters with flaws as well as strengths.

No offense, but I think the ASM movie version of Gwen has zero depth of character (even taking into account that she's "just" a supporting character), much less development over the movies or even any defining characteristics beyond being Peter Parker's girlfriend. While I do hesitate when using "Mary Sue" to mean "badly-written character," honestly, she is my go-to example of what I think a "Mary Sue" looks like. (Mileage will vary and that's perfectly fine, but I've never really understood why Emma Stone's Gwen was considered such a great love interest character at the time, much less now. I feel like I saw a different movie.)

I completely agree with this statement. I don't think Gwen Stacy fits the original definition of the word. Or the true definition.

And now, I even see some male characters called "mary sue", lol!

I think it's become a gender neutral term, personally and I do use it as such.

I would be inclined to agree, though, that the term's definition has shifted from the original intent (self-insert wish fulfillment character which presumably has no real flaws) and come to be used broadly to mean "badly written character without depth." Also agree that this morph has also lead to it being a meaningless way for people to justify not liking a character.

[SpiderClops]

No offense, but I think the ASM movie version of Gwen has zero depth of character (even taking into account that she's "just" a supporting character), much less development over the movies or even any defining characteristics beyond being Peter Parker's girlfriend. While I do hesitate when using "Mary Sue" to mean "badly-written character," honestly, she is my go-to example of what I think a "Mary Sue" looks like. (Mileage will vary and that's perfectly fine, but I've never really understood why Emma Stone's Gwen was considered such a great love interest character at the time, much less now. I feel like I saw a different movie.)



I think it's become a gender neutral term, personally and I do use it as such.

I would be inclined to agree, though, that the term's definition has shifted from the original intent (self-insert wish fulfillment character which presumably has no real flaws) and come to be used broadly to mean "badly written character without depth." Also agree that this morph has also lead to it being a meaningless way for people to justify not liking a character.

Emma Stone's Gwen Stacy was loved because Emma Stone is a terrific and effortlessly charming actress. And because the two leads had great chemistry. But the character herself, I didn't like it. She kind of was a bit too perfect. They also made her the smarter one. I too, am hesitant to call her a Mary Sue, but I mean, what were her real flaws?

Though, if you want to see an absolute legit Mary Sue, then watch The Ridiculous 6(I mean, don't. It's a god awful movie). Adam Sandler's character fits every single definition of the term.

[Lukmendes]

When introduced she was short tempered girl who bullied Peter, so she was pretty much a Liz clone, but in college, they sweetened her over time, but at best she was just "Miss Perfect", not a Mary Sue (Yes there are differences between lol).

Although after her death, sometimes when other characters talk about her can give that impression ("She always saw the best in the world" and whatnot, overrating her personality, which is one of the Mary Sue's traits), she still definitely isn't.

[Alan2099]

honestly, she is my go-to example of what I think a "Mary Sue" looks like.

Consider yourself lucky then. You've never ran into any really bad characters.

[TheCape]

When she was alive she wasn't one, she has been kind of idealized by many after her death and sometimes can skirt the territory a bit, but i wouldn't call her one either, i prefer to see it as their way to cope with her death in universe (ia not really weird for people to idealized lost loved one after their departure), even if it can get very annoying.

[Mister Mets]

Mary Sue used to have a very specific meaning that would not apply at all to Gwen Stacy. Now it feels like it's just a term used to describe female characters someone doesn't like. I don't see her as self-insert fan fiction nor as wish fulfillment. I didn't think she started off as a well-developed character, but that doesn't make her a Mary Sue.

She's also not seen as perfect. She gets upset, comes to the wrong conclusion sometimes, etc.

[RedQueen]

I think she was a character they didn't know how to really stick down initially, but in death she seems she's got the martyr thing going on, I don't mean that negatively but, but the Gwen that everyone remembers is a saint, depending if you count her Osborn cheating and getting knocked up with his goblin twins.

[Frontier]

I don't think the actual Gwen Stacy in publication was anything close to a Mary Sue, but in her death she has definitely been idealized and made out to be almost like a Saint or the perfect girl (especially when compared to Mary Jane).