Mary Jane Watson/Parker Appreciation Thread 2018

[millernumber1]

Let us remember that the game is still raking up sales numbers and sales numbers alone do not account for fans of the game as one copy can be played by multiple people and many people can observe the game's storyline and like it even whilst not being players. I myself fell in love with the game's story and got the novel and comic book tie in and visual guide despite not even owning a PS4!

Appeal isn't really the discussion though is it? Emma Stone's Gwen was much more appealing than canon Gwen despite being only superficially like her. I thought we were talking about whether she was a representation of the character.

But...that is accurate to a younger Mary Jane. She kinda did that with Harry and Peter in the Silver Age.

Plus is it really a negative to portray a young teenager as flawed in this capacity?

Yup.

It is also part and parcel of an annoying trend in Hollywood movies this decade of doing stupid reveals of characters who at first don't seem to be the characters. Miranda Tate in Dark Knight Rises. Blofeld in Spectre. Kahn in Star Trek Into Darkness.

I was totally on board with Zendaya playing Mary Jane but if she's gonna be like this, **** if this is how she begins then I hope she isn't. Cast someone else to play the character properly, and sure why not make it another POC actress. Nothing about MJ requires her to be white so whoever can do the job best.

Also I hate that the movies and other media treat Spider-Man love interests as interchangeable or like those toys that you can swap out pieces from as opposed to recognizing there are specific traits to each of them.

Some Triple A games have budgets comparable to movies I believe.

It's almost like Spider-Verse had an agenda or something considering multiple MJ's either die, see their spider love interests horribly die, become victims of some kind or in the case of Spider Woman as drawn by Greg Land wholly unnecesarilly get punched in the face....all sandwiched between Superior where MJ was the biggest ******* to Peter by the end of the story (then showed up just to call him an idiot in ASM #1) and Spider-Gwen's hyped launch featuring Em Jay as an unlikable diva generating much hate for her from reviews at the time.

Video games are different now than in the 2000s.

Spidey PS4 was getting like movie posters and trailers, mega hype and Marvel Unlimited even promoted it.

They are starting to become dominant in the cultural zeitgeist in a way movies and TV are and this was only the first game. We will have DLCs, sequels, more tie-in materials too.

Remember BvS borrowed influence from the Arkham games and Spider-Man PS4 out the gate prepped the groundwork for their version of Spider-Man to have a life well beyond just that one game. He's got a novel, he's appearing in comics, his design was specified to make him a BRAND recognizable as Insomniac's specific version. The Arkham Batman got an animated movie and Injustice a comic book series and both had merchandise a plenty beyond that stuff.

Heck, hate to say it but it was the Arkham games that brought a mass awareness to Mark Hamill as the Joker and Conroy as Batman and the best takes on either. It wasn't that people weren't saying that about BTAS before, but their roles in those games made people more aware/reminded them of the show and between them insisted upon a more mass audience that those versions and that show were in fact THE best versions of those characters.

Yeah they were staggeringly low but that was due to all the context I mentioned.

It was a series that by it's innate nature should've died after issue #6 but defied that.

As for why it kept going it was likely due to the digests. Much like Spider-Girl, at that time all ages digests were being distributed at schools and book fares and other such places catering to or possessing a large pre-teen/young teen audience, the audience both SG and SMLMJ were specifically tailored for (aside from you know female fans obvs) and as such they sold extremely well. Shockingly when you put out a comic book made for a mass market audience on the actual mass market itself it sells really well if it's a quality product.

this was a factor in USM's success too because the linearly numbered trades for the series singular narrative (as opposed to ASM and Spec and Web and Sensational and Unlmited and PPSM and Marvel Knights and FNSM and Avenging and Superior and so on) allowed readers on the mass market to pick up volume 1 and keep going until the caught up and then switched to the single issues, just like in the Japanese comic book market.

I also love the game, despite holding off on buying it until I move to a place with regular access to a PS4 next year (and hopefully getting a bit of a price discount). I've also bought the novel and several of the comics tie-ins! (Spider-Geddon #0, with the MJ variant, of course, West Coast Avengers #2, and Amazing Spider-Man #5 variants. I was very tempted to get the Spider-Geddon #1 variant, but even though the cover itself was great, I really didn't like the issue itself, so I passed, sadly - especially since it was another $5 #1.)

Since I still think that the various MJ's I love aren't really the same character, I do think appeal should enter into the discussion.

That's a really good observation about dumb reveals. I think the obsession with "No spoilers, even of information that is revealed early in a film" is really destructive to good storytelling.

That's a good point. I do think I've seen the SMLMJ digests in libraries pretty frequently. And I'd be happy to give them to most middle grade kids!

USM also benefitted from the amazing combination of such a long run of one writer and artist, really selling the look of Ultimate Peter and MJ and their world (even though I do love Lafuente, Immomen, Pichelli, and Marquez).

[Spidercide]

I can guarantee you that ABSOULTELY NOBODY thinks MJ is a slut just because Emma Stone said it once in an interview four years ago that pretty much nobody knows or cares about. They like Gwen because they liked her in those movies, and because of Spider-Gwen. But they also like MJ because despite everything else that's gone on, people still think of her as Spider-Man's main romantic interest.

Bro I've been to tumblr you've not seen some of the dark **** I've witnessed there (the realm where Spider-Man is problematic because he makes fun of his villains who are all mentally ill but if Miles or Spider-Gwen did that it'd be okay cos they aren't white/male and also did you know Tom Holland wearing his jeans a certain way=he is obviously bisexual and trans and the MCU is so evil for not acknowleding this fact) where a lot of people absolutely MJ is condemned as a slut and also someone who only loved Peter not Spider-Man. Hell Over the years on or lurking on these boards I have seen it. Multiple times I've seen people condemn MJ as a slut because she obviously had sex with Bruce before her wedding and she was a dirty rotten adulterer because of the Jason Jerome subplot in the 1980s (you know that subplot where a piece of **** creepy actor harassed her, wonder if anyone would dare diss MJ over that nowdays).

As for nobody knows or cares about it again all the people who've posted, quoted or said stuff directly stemming from things related to those movies says otherwise.

It was/is for a lot of people essentially a tagline that MJ loved Spider-Man, Gwen loved Peter and that's the difference between them and why Gwen is more awesome. Because that narrative was spun out of a misguided film reboot attempting to sell the general public on their movies being different and Gwen being one of those differences and worthy of support so they threw out a BS but easily quotable and digestable phrase to get people to wrap their heads around it.

[Spidercide]

I think Peter did kind of take advantage of Liz a little in that he kept making promises with her only to end up ditching her and the rest of their group, but he still snagged a date with her to the homecoming dance only to still end up ditching her and landing her dad in prison (even if she had no idea about the last point).

I really don't think Peter treated Liz all that well in the movie, even if I don't think he meant her any harm.

That isn't taking advantage of someone. Not when you have a supremely good and justifiable reason for doing that, i.e. being Spider-Man and helping people who's lives might be endangered.


Saving people's lives>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Breaking a promise to go out on a date.

Equally taking advantage of her would never include landing her Dad in prison. Her Dad was a criminal thief/murder who was endangering countless lives by selling dangerous alien weapons tech to other criminals.

Her Dad needed to go down and he only ditched her to put him away AFTER he learned the truth about him.

Peter did the right thing.

[millernumber1]

That isn't taking advantage of someone. Not when you have a supremely good and justifiable reason for doing that, i.e. being Spider-Man and helping people who's lives might be endangered.

Saving people's lives>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Breaking a promise to go out on a date.

Equally taking advantage of her would never include landing her Dad in prison. Her Dad was a criminal thief/murder who was endangering countless lives by selling dangerous alien weapons tech to other criminals.

Her Dad needed to go down and he only ditched her to put him away AFTER he learned the truth about him.

Peter did the right thing.

Well, this gets into the whole question of whether Peter should be involved romantically with people who don't know he's Spider-Man. I think he should not. But MCU Peter is young, so I don't think it was a horrible thing for him to do - but I do think it's a sign of his immaturity.

[Spidercide]

I also love the game, despite holding off on buying it until I move to a place with regular access to a PS4 next year (and hopefully getting a bit of a price discount). I've also bought the novel and several of the comics tie-ins! (Spider-Geddon #0, with the MJ variant, of course, West Coast Avengers #2, and Amazing Spider-Man #5 variants. I was very tempted to get the Spider-Geddon #1 variant, but even though the cover itself was great, I really didn't like the issue itself, so I passed, sadly - especially since it was another $5 #1.)

Since I still think that the various MJ's I love aren't really the same character, I do think appeal should enter into the discussion.

That's a really good observation about dumb reveals. I think the obsession with "No spoilers, even of information that is revealed early in a film" is really destructive to good storytelling.

That's a good point. I do think I've seen the SMLMJ digests in libraries pretty frequently. And I'd be happy to give them to most middle grade kids!

USM also benefitted from the amazing combination of such a long run of one writer and artist, really selling the look of Ultimate Peter and MJ and their world (even though I do love Lafuente, Immomen, Pichelli, and Marquez).

I think people really underestimate the neccessitiy for a stable creative team.

Marvel in their foolishness to generate events and do so in large quantity quickly bow to the idea of having multiple artists but that's just a bad idea.

Honestly it wouldn't be that bad if they were both strong artists with complimentary styles, like McFarlane and Larsen in the 1980s, but often it's like there is one guy who is the star and then whoever the **** they can get to fill in that day. It even affects the books that come out twice a month. I'd infinitly prefer Otterly to do 12 straight issues rather than have to have him on five issues Ramos on another five and back and fourth. Their styles don't go together and like with events the end result feels very much like you've got new actors showing up to play the parts of the same characters for a while and then it goes back. it just ruins the immersion of a story.

Say what you will about Bronze age Marvel artwork but one genuine advantage of it was that there was an in-house style and character models that minimized the differences from one artist to another. Case in point, whilst no one (sans Saviuk) drew Mary Jane as well as Romita Senior (because he's the GOAT) Gil Kane, Ross Andru, Keith Pollard and 80s Romita Junior still drew MJ similarly enough to him and to one another that to the casual eye they weren't drastically different, there was still a consistency and cohesion to their takes which wasn't gonna alienate long time or newer readers. Archie for the longest time was the same way. Everyone drew Archie in a set classic style and whilst that meant you didn't get variety you also didn't lose immersion.

THAT was the strength of USM more than anything and in that sense Bagley was in truth way more important than Bendis himself, I don't even think Bendis' storytelling style catered that great to Bagley's talents since it minimized action set pieces which Bagley is one of the best of the best at doing, esp for Spider-Man.

[marhawkman]

Does anybody know what she is saying? It could be Spidey is giving her a web ride (both going to the same location and might be late). However Michelle is afraid of heights (Before she didn't want to go to the top of the Washington Monument giving an excuse but maybe they could play it up she's afraid of heights thus why she has her eyes closed here holding tight. With Spidey swinging up high at fast speeds over NYC anybody afraid of heights such a ride would make a person panic.

All I heard was stuff like: are you okay? Yeah, I'll see you later. Doesn't really sound like a conversation.

[marhawkman]

Since I still think that the various MJ's I love aren't really the same character, I do think appeal should enter into the discussion.

After a lot of pondering I think my favorite was actually Hydro-MJ.

Yes I know people are gonna say silly things like "But she's not the real MJ!" or "she was a dumb plot device!" I... don't... care.

[Inversed]

Bro I've been to tumblr you've not seen some of the dark **** I've witnessed there (the realm where Spider-Man is problematic because he makes fun of his villains who are all mentally ill but if Miles or Spider-Gwen did that it'd be okay cos they aren't white/male and also did you know Tom Holland wearing his jeans a certain way=he is obviously bisexual and trans and the MCU is so evil for not acknowleding this fact) where a lot of people absolutely MJ is condemned as a slut and also someone who only loved Peter not Spider-Man. Hell Over the years on or lurking on these boards I have seen it. Multiple times I've seen people condemn MJ as a slut because she obviously had sex with Bruce before her wedding and she was a dirty rotten adulterer because of the Jason Jerome subplot in the 1980s (you know that subplot where a piece of **** creepy actor harassed her, wonder if anyone would dare diss MJ over that nowdays).

As for nobody knows or cares about it again all the people who've posted, quoted or said stuff directly stemming from things related to those movies says otherwise.

It was/is for a lot of people essentially a tagline that MJ loved Spider-Man, Gwen loved Peter and that's the difference between them and why Gwen is more awesome. Because that narrative was spun out of a misguided film reboot attempting to sell the general public on their movies being different and Gwen being one of those differences and worthy of support so they threw out a BS but easily quotable and digestable phrase to get people to wrap their heads around it.

Those people on Tumblr are also a very very very small minority. Yes there may be people out there who think she's a "slut" for various reasons, almost all of which probably wrong and dumb, but I have NEVER seen people say that she is just because Emma Stone said it once in an interview years ago, which is what you were insinuating. Also haven't seen any of that kind of talk in the boards before either.

Thinking that the Amazing Spider-Man movies making Gwen the main love interest is their way of diminishing MJ's importance and trying to push a narrative that she sucks and Gwen is better, is really looking WAY too deep into it.

[Kevinroc]

Those people on Tumblr are also a very very very small minority. Yes there may be people out there who think she's a "slut" for various reasons, almost all of which probably wrong and dumb, but I have NEVER seen people say that she is just because Emma Stone said it once in an interview years ago, which is what you were insinuating. Also haven't seen any of that kind of talk in the boards before either.

Thinking that the Amazing Spider-Man movies making Gwen the main love interest is their way of diminishing MJ's importance and trying to push a narrative that she sucks and Gwen is better, is really looking WAY too deep into it.

I remember Stone's "MJ's a slut" from an SNL monologue. I thought it was cringe-inducing then, and I think it's cringe-inducing now. (There were a few who went all-in on that comment, and it was embarrassing to see.)

[millernumber1]

I think people really underestimate the neccessitiy for a stable creative team.

Marvel in their foolishness to generate events and do so in large quantity quickly bow to the idea of having multiple artists but that's just a bad idea.

Honestly it wouldn't be that bad if they were both strong artists with complimentary styles, like McFarlane and Larsen in the 1980s, but often it's like there is one guy who is the star and then whoever the **** they can get to fill in that day. It even affects the books that come out twice a month. I'd infinitly prefer Otterly to do 12 straight issues rather than have to have him on five issues Ramos on another five and back and fourth. Their styles don't go together and like with events the end result feels very much like you've got new actors showing up to play the parts of the same characters for a while and then it goes back. it just ruins the immersion of a story.

Say what you will about Bronze age Marvel artwork but one genuine advantage of it was that there was an in-house style and character models that minimized the differences from one artist to another. Case in point, whilst no one (sans Saviuk) drew Mary Jane as well as Romita Senior (because he's the GOAT) Gil Kane, Ross Andru, Keith Pollard and 80s Romita Junior still drew MJ similarly enough to him and to one another that to the casual eye they weren't drastically different, there was still a consistency and cohesion to their takes which wasn't gonna alienate long time or newer readers. Archie for the longest time was the same way. Everyone drew Archie in a set classic style and whilst that meant you didn't get variety you also didn't lose immersion.

THAT was the strength of USM more than anything and in that sense Bagley was in truth way more important than Bendis himself, I don't even think Bendis' storytelling style catered that great to Bagley's talents since it minimized action set pieces which Bagley is one of the best of the best at doing, esp for Spider-Man.

Part of me likes the twice a month schedule, since we get more story that way, but it's murder on the creative teams. Sometimes I appreciate that, like when we get Lieber for three pages an issue for a Superior Foes of Spider-Man reunion in the last two issues. But too often, it's just rotating fill-in artists who have no ownership of characters or designs. I hate that.

And while I don't know that the art was more important than the writing for USM - the was a real appeal and strength of building things together that Bendis did for 108 issues with Bagley - it is an achievement that I wish more people strove for these days.

[Frontier]

That isn't taking advantage of someone. Not when you have a supremely good and justifiable reason for doing that, i.e. being Spider-Man and helping people who's lives might be endangered.

I never said he took advantage of her, I just don't think Peter treated her very well in that movie.

I remember Stone's "MJ's a slut" from an SNL monologue. I thought it was cringe-inducing then, and I think it's cringe-inducing now. (There were a few who went all-in on that comment, and it was embarrassing to see.)

I think it's because of those "slut" comments or that kind of view of classic Mary Jane that Ultimate MJ seems to be more the go-toe for adaptions these days then something resembling 616 Mary Jane.

I mean, I love Ultimate Mary Jane, but I also think her personality is more like your standard female lead then 616 Mary Jane, which makes her more palatable for adaptions.

[Inversed]

I think it's because of those "slut" comments or that kind of view of classic Mary Jane that Ultimate MJ seems to be more the go-toe for adaptions these days then something resembling 616 Mary Jane.

I mean, I love Ultimate Mary Jane, but I also think her personality is more like your standard female lead then 616 Mary Jane, which makes her more palatable for adaptions.

I honestly don't believe there was/is this grand conspiracy going against her, and I especially don't think a comment like that is the reason behind it. Of course there are gonna be people who have a controversial view of a character that many people disagree with, but that's not going to be the reason why decisions are made.

To me it always felt like the Raimi films, Spectacular, Ultimate, the PS4 game, etc. don't necessarily take influence from one specific interpretation of the character, but instead take several aspects from a bunch to make their own.

[Frontier]

To me it always felt like the Raimi films, Spectacular, Ultimate, the PS4 game, etc. don't necessarily take influence from one specific interpretation of the character, but instead take several aspects from a bunch to make their own.

I think Spectacular definitely took the most influence from 616. Ditto with MJ from the 90's cartoon.

It's only recently with the Ultimate cartoon and PS4 that Ultimate Mary Jane has been the primary influence, although Shailene Woodley's MJ looks like she would've been very inspired by Ultimate MJ as well.

[Inversed]

I think Spectacular definitely took the most influence from 616. Ditto with MJ from the 90's cartoon.

It's only recently with the Ultimate cartoon and PS4 that Ultimate Mary Jane has been the primary influence, although Shailene Woodley's MJ looks like she would've been very inspired by Ultimate MJ as well.

It helps that Ultimate MJ is just generally an easier character to take influence more, leaves more room for changing to fit their story, while 616 MJ has been around for so long with a distinct background, seems to work best when you're adapting closer to those Spider-Man stories, which is what Spectacular & the 90s show did.

[Spidercide]

I never said he took advantage of her, I just don't think Peter treated her very well in that movie.

I think it's because of those "slut" comments or that kind of view of classic Mary Jane that Ultimate MJ seems to be more the go-toe for adaptions these days then something resembling 616 Mary Jane.

I mean, I love Ultimate Mary Jane, but I also think her personality is more like your standard female lead then 616 Mary Jane, which makes her more palatable for adaptions.

But didn't you say: "I think Peter did kind of take advantage of Liz a little in that he kept making promises with her only to end up ditching her and the rest of their group, "????

But again, he had perfectly justifiable reasons to treat her the way he did. It wasn't his fault really.

I like Ult MJ when viewed in total isolation, my problem with her and USM as a whole was that it was intended as and praised as this wonderful modern updating/adaptation of the original stories but often it was just the 'different for the sake of different' universe, MJ being an example. Although her role and FUNCTION and the depth of the feelings she and Peter had replicated a lot of 616 married Peter and MJ, her innate personality wasn't the same. In fact Emma Stone's Gwen was based more upon her than canon Gwen.

It goes back to what I said about it being shitty that Spidey love itnerests are treated as interchangable. In this case Ult MJ was apparently based more upon Bendis' own high school girlfriend than actual canon MJ. In that sense she was Michelle. Given the same place of importance within the SPider narrative as MJ, given her superfical traits (name/look/initials) but in her specific nuances not being the actual character.

I honestly don't believe there was/is this grand conspiracy going against her, and I especially don't think a comment like that is the reason behind it. Of course there are gonna be people who have a controversial view of a character that many people disagree with, but that's not going to be the reason why decisions are made.

To me it always felt like the Raimi films, Spectacular, Ultimate, the PS4 game, etc. don't necessarily take influence from one specific interpretation of the character, but instead take several aspects from a bunch to make their own.

Not a conspiracy, but within Marvel comics themselves there has at various times definitely been an anti-MJ (sometimes manifesting as a pro-Gwen) agenda.

Like Quesada obviously doesn't merely dislike the idea of Spidey being married on principle, he obviously dislikes MJ being with Peter in general and is butthurt over Gwen's death.