Spider-Man: Life Story By Chip Zdarsky & Mark Bagley

[Spider-Tiger]

Gwen is gonna be in her mid-20s when Norman drops her off a bridge. Will she be married to Peter during "The Night Gwen Stacy (Gwen Parker?) Dies"?

Assuming the next one takes place around 1976, it also means that Peter and Gwen would have been together for roughly a decade prior to her death as opposed to the 2 or so years of 616.

I honestly wouldn't have expected Gwen to appear in issue one. I thought they would focus on the Bugle cast, maybe Liz, and Flash to represent the Ditko years, and then shift the Romita cast to the 70s when Peter is in his 20s. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.

[WebSlingWonder]

....

Actually, it may be this first issue that's 40 pages. And while I like your plan, I think it'd take entirely too long to tell. At that point, it's better to just reread the released issues. This at least gets the highlights and the jackpots of Spider-Man history.

EDIT: I just checked: each issue is 40 pages! That's awesome!

[Kevinroc]

Assuming the next one takes place around 1976, it also means that Peter and Gwen would have been together for roughly a decade prior to her death as opposed to the 2 or so years of 616.

I honestly wouldn't have expected Gwen to appear in issue one. I thought they would focus on the Bugle cast, maybe Liz, and Flash to represent the Ditko years, and then shift the Romita cast to the 70s when Peter is in his 20s. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.

The Night Gwen Stacy Died was published in 1973.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

I honestly wouldn't have expected Gwen to appear in issue one. I thought they would focus on the Bugle cast, maybe Liz, and Flash to represent the Ditko years, and then shift the Romita cast to the 70s when Peter is in his 20s. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.

John Romita's first issue on Spider-Man was in 1966, the year in which this comic is set. His first issue was in August 1966...four years exactly after AF#15 (August 1962). What you see in this issue is aside from the movie shoehorned in details, quite accurate to the timeline.

Heck if we consider that there was this big gap between AF#15 in 1962 and ASM #1 came out in March 1963, then Romita actually wrote more Spider-Man issues in the 60s then Ditko did, and his work is more representative of that decade than the Sturdy One's.

[Spider-Tiger]

The Night Gwen Stacy Died was published in 1973.

I know. I suppose it makes sense that the next one would take place in 1973. I was assuming that each issue was exactly a decade apart.

[Frontier]

Assuming the next one takes place around 1976, it also means that Peter and Gwen would have been together for roughly a decade prior to her death as opposed to the 2 or so years of 616.

I honestly wouldn't have expected Gwen to appear in issue one. I thought they would focus on the Bugle cast, maybe Liz, and Flash to represent the Ditko years, and then shift the Romita cast to the 70s when Peter is in his 20s. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.

Considering the era and the real world context, I'm not surprised Gwen and the college gang are there since this is a pretty close approximation of what Spider-Man was like during the actual Vietnam era.

[WebSlingWonder]

John Romita's first issue on Spider-Man was in 1966, the year in which this comic is set. His first issue was in August 1966...four years exactly after AF#15 (August 1962). What you see in this issue is aside from the movie shoehorned in details, quite accurate to the timeline.

Heck if we consider that there was this big gap between AF#15 in 1962 and ASM #1 came out in March 1963, then Romita actually wrote more Spider-Man issues in the 60s then Ditko did, and his work is more representative of that decade than the Sturdy One's.

You say "movie shoehorned in details". Do you not like the movie that much?

[Revolutionary_Jack]

You say "movie shoehorned in details". Do you not like the movie that much?

I do feel that the original comics should be separate from adaptations and when you are doing a series like this you should be accurate and representative of the actual content of that time. Because otherwise you create inconsistencies. Why is Peter like the Lee-Romita version of Peter but Gwen is now "Science Nerd Emma Gwen"? That makes no sense. It's selective and unrepresentative.

With the exception of ITSV and Greg Weisman's Spectacular cartoons, I have never been completely satisfied by a single movie or animated adaptation of Spider-Man. The Raimi movies are the best but even then, I like the first movie best, and to me the first movie is ruined by the ending in the graveyard, even if I like the actors and so on. To me I love the movie because it was the first time I saw Willem Dafoe who is one of my favorite actors. And to me he's the greatest villain in any Spider-Man movie, and one of the greatest screen villains in any superhero movie. I don't like the TASM movies at all. Hated them from Day 1. Andrew Garfield is a good actor, Emma Stone is a good actress but I don't like the versions of Peter and Gwen Stacy they played. I like her far less than Kirsten Dunst's unfairly criticized MJ in the Raimi films (yeah her MJ was altered from comics!MJ but far less so than Tobey's Peter from comics!Peter). TASM ruined the Death of Captain Stacy, one of the greatest Spider-Man stories, the sequel ruined The Night Gwen Stacy Died (ditto). For those stories to have on screen the impact their comics did have, you need to get it right out-of-the-gate. You don't get do-overs. It's why people were aghast with Batman V. Superman, it did Doomsday and messed it up, and that's pretty much it, you can never do that story right again.

Actors are actors and they can convey aspects of a character better than writers/artists can. A writer/artist can never make comics Norman as weird and fascinating as Dafoe because Dafoe is Dafoe. Similarly Emma Stone is a good actress and a charismatic presence but that will not by itself translate itself into the comics version of that character.

[WebSlingWonder]

I do feel that the original comics should be separate from adaptations and when you are doing a series like this you should be accurate and representative of the actual content of that time. Because otherwise you create inconsistencies. Why is Peter like the Lee-Romita version of Peter but Gwen is now "Science Nerd Emma Gwen"? That makes no sense. It's selective and unrepresentative.

With the exception of ITSV and Greg Weisman's Spectacular cartoons, I have never been completely satisfied by a single movie or animated adaptation of Spider-Man. The Raimi movies are the best but even then, I like the first movie best, and to me the first movie is ruined by the ending in the graveyard, even if I like the actors and so on. To me I love the movie because it was the first time I saw Willem Dafoe who is one of my favorite actors. And to me he's the greatest villain in any Spider-Man movie, and one of the greatest screen villains in any superhero movie. I don't like the TASM movies at all. Hated them from Day 1. Andrew Garfield is a good actor, Emma Stone is a good actress but I don't like the versions of Peter and Gwen Stacy they played. I like her far less than Kirsten Dunst's unfairly criticized MJ in the Raimi films (yeah her MJ was altered from comics!MJ but far less so than Tobey's Peter from comics!Peter). TASM ruined the Death of Captain Stacy, one of the greatest Spider-Man stories, the sequel ruined The Night Gwen Stacy Died (ditto). For those stories to have on screen the impact their comics did have, you need to get it right out-of-the-gate. You don't get do-overs. It's why people were aghast with Batman V. Superman, it did Doomsday and messed it up, and that's pretty much it, you can never do that story right again.

Actors are actors and they can convey aspects of a character better than writers/artists can. A writer/artist can never make comics Norman as weird and fascinating as Dafoe because Dafoe is Dafoe. Similarly Emma Stone is a good actress and a charismatic presence but that will not by itself translate itself into the comics version of that character.

Well, to each their own, I guess. :P

[Spider-Tiger]

Hmm.. If they're going meta with this and trying capture what the comics actually looked like in a given year for each decade, here's how I'm hoping it plays out:

1966: First appearance of MJ
1973: Death of Gwen
1987: the Wedding and KLH
1993 or 1995: the death of Harry or Aunt May
2007: Peter and MJ separate
Present day: Miles Morales. Peter and MJ reconcile.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Hmm.. If they're going meta with this and trying capture what the comics actually looked like in a given year for each decade, here's how I'm hoping it plays out:

1966: First appearance of MJ

If you consider ASM#25, her first appearance, then Mary Jane first appeared in June 1965. But yeah, November 1966 (ASM #42) is her first in-panel appearance.

Basically 1966-1967 was the most important 14 month stretch in the history of Spider-Man. Those first Romita issues were far more commercially successful than Ditko's, you had more permanent features introduced in that then any time before and after. 1967 also the Spider-Man cartoon, the first Spider-Man adaptation to another medium.

1987: the Wedding and KLH

You know Peter and Mary Jane got engaged and married in September 1987, 25 years and a month after AF#15. And KLH appeared in the same 25th Anniversary year. So they should be 40 years old when they get married in Life Story if that were the real-time case.

Nobody knows what Zdarsky will do. My feeling is that he's going to play this by ear and follow his own path. So he'll have Emma Gwen in the 60s why not, Bob-Cut Gwen in the 70s and who knows what else. I'll cop to the fact that a fannish obsession with details and accuracy and representation can get in the way of inspiration and doing a good story and being true to concept. It's okay to make these comments and details in message boards like this since that is made for pedants like myself.

[WebSlingWonder]

Nobody knows what Zdarsky will do. My feeling is that he's going to play this by ear and follow his own path. So he'll have Emma Gwen in the 60s why not, Bob-Cut Gwen in the 70s and who knows what else. I'll cop to the fact that a fannish obsession with details and accuracy and representation can get in the way of inspiration and doing a good story and being true to concept. It's okay to make these comments and details in message boards like this since that is made for pedants like myself.

Wow, I was about to say this exact thing. Did we all just agree???

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Wow, I was about to say this exact thing. Did we all just agree???

We did...

[WebSlingWonder]

We did...

Someone ring a bell. Hell froze over!!!

[your_name_here]

Okay I’ve been on edge about the series for a while. Seeing each issue is 40 pages was what I needed.
I’m in.
What an innovative idea.