Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 108
  1. #31
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    904

    Default

    Having her back was the point of the whole exercise. Retconning Sins Past was just a requirement.

  2. #32

    Default

    Was this the first time that Norman Osbourne met Spider-Gwen? If so, this was a good story to reference. Not just any random story of Osbourne being evil, but one specifically related to the late Gwen. And not the one of the bridge (she already knows that, and let's be honest, it's an overused call-back) but another one she does not know, and so it can shock her.

  3. #33
    The King Fears NO ONE! Triniking1234's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    10,950

    Default

    I haven't finished Slott's run but I don't think she turned up in that Norman vs. Spidey arc that happened before Pete lost his company. So this should be her first meeting with 616 Norman but she met the one that was the Spidey of his universe in Spider-Verse 2.
    "Cable was right!"

  4. #34
    Ultimate Member Mister Mets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    18,913

    Default

    Retconning it requires bringing it up.

    It's also like to be a lengthy and inaccessible comic which would limit its potential success.

    Marvel probably missed the perfect opportunity to retcon it during Secret Invasion. At the time, they probably thought it made more sense as an element of the character's backstory at a time when Norman Osborn forgot why he really killed Gwen Stacy.

    Although I do now wonder if it could make sense to have a more continuity heavy satellite book to feature these kinds of stories.
    Sincerely,
    Thomas Mets

  5. #35
    Incredible Member Toonstrack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    586

    Default

    why retcon it at all? Norman Osborns moment in 850 hardening back to it was brilliant and made you want Peter to end him then and there. At this point use it for villain points for norman.

  6. #36
    Benefactor / Malefactor H-E-D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    3,454

    Default

    The biggest problem with Sins Past is the kids.

    The idea that Gwen boned Norman? Gross, yeah. Uncomfortable to think about. But, speaking frankly, within the realm of possibility for what kind of stupid ass mistakes somebody her age could make. It's uncomfortable realism, and while I don't think I'd have gone there myself, in tangible terms, it's one of the more plausible retcons from over the years.

    But the part where they had kids that grew up super fast and then Spider-Man made out with one? Yeah, no, that doesn't work.

  7. #37
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    3,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    Marvel doesn't retcon Sins' Past because it's too much work and the effect of such a retcon could bring more attention to a story than it would deserve.

    Marvel has a practise of sweeping stuff under the rug when it comes to Spider-Man:
    -- Spider-Man accidentally killing Charlie
    -- The "Spider-Baby"
    -- Mary Jane being kidnapped and locked for months on end by a crazy stalker.
    -- OMD and Mephisto

    Marvel can get away with this because this is a story only known to a paltry few comics readers and fans. The vast majority of the people who know Spider-Man from toys, cartoons, games, movies don't know about Sins' Past unless they come across some listicle or a clickbait piece about weird comics and so on.
    So the spider baby has never been mentioned since the 90s?

  8. #38
    Ultimate Member WebLurker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    10,073

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shooshoomanjoe View Post
    So the spider baby has never been mentioned since the 90s?
    Beyond anything Mayday appears in, not that I'm aware of. Unless there's a story out of it, unpopular comic stories just get ignored. I mean, I don't think OMD would've ever been a thing if the writers could've just ignored the wedding story (and all the references to Spider-Man having a wife) going forward.

    (Come to think of it, didn't JMS go on record that he'd been assuming that he could erase "Sins Past" with OMD, but then got vetoed?)
    Doctor Strange: "You are the right person to replace Logan."
    X-23: "I know there are people who disapprove... Guys on the Internet mainly."
    (All-New Wolverine #4)

  9. #39
    Extraordinary Member TheCape's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Venezuela
    Posts
    8,641

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shooshoomanjoe View Post
    So the spider baby has never been mentioned since the 90s?
    It was mentioned a few times, i think that MJ was even going to counselling for her miscarriage back in the 90s and Gargan references it too in Marvel Knights by Millar ("You kill his kid, he kills your kid"). But overall, not a lot.
    "Wow. You made Spider-Man sad, congratulations. I stabbed The Hulk last week"
    Wolverine, Venom Annual # 1 (2018)
    Nobody does it better by Jeff Loveness

    "I am Thou, Thou Art I"
    Persona

  10. #40
    Extraordinary Member Lukmendes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    7,279

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Prime View Post
    I'm actually quite mad that Gwen though Peter would be ok with being a cuck.
    Was she even planning to tell him? Because if not then she would basically make him be unaware of being one.

    Quote Originally Posted by Triniking1234 View Post
    I haven't finished Slott's run but I don't think she turned up in that Norman vs. Spidey arc that happened before Pete lost his company. So this should be her first meeting with 616 Norman but she met the one that was the Spidey of his universe in Spider-Verse 2.
    Gwen only showed up in Clone Conspiracy, she was gone by the time Peter invaded that country, so yeah, this is the first time they met.

    Quote Originally Posted by Toonstrack View Post
    why retcon it at all? Norman Osborns moment in 850 hardening back to it was brilliant and made you want Peter to end him then and there. At this point use it for villain points for norman.
    Yeah, it's nice that he managed to piss off even the audience, for weird reasons, but kudos to him lol.

    Quote Originally Posted by H-E-D View Post
    The biggest problem with Sins Past is the kids.

    The idea that Gwen boned Norman? Gross, yeah. Uncomfortable to think about. But, speaking frankly, within the realm of possibility for what kind of stupid ass mistakes somebody her age could make. It's uncomfortable realism, and while I don't think I'd have gone there myself, in tangible terms, it's one of the more plausible retcons from over the years.

    But the part where they had kids that grew up super fast and then Spider-Man made out with one? Yeah, no, that doesn't work.
    Considering how much Gwen was obssessed with Peter, it's weird the affair happened to begin with, though at least it happened while they were on a break, and her father had died, so yeah, not that far fetched, still really shitty even with those more understandable reasonings though.

  11. #41
    Fantastic Member JTHM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    272

    Default

    Personally, I just can't buy Gwen sleeping with Norman at all. Does it make sense? I guess from a certain point of view, but that doesn't mean it does an irreparable damage to the character. To me, it just...I don't know, it doesn't work. Gwen cucked Peter with Norman Osborn. Saying it out loud just makes it seem how bad it is. Like, I am all onboard with giving the original Gwen flaws and traits of her own that distinguish her from the 'ideal girl' that she had become post-death. But like, again, there is a difference between that and literally making her sleep with Norman Osborn.

    And honestly, that's really the big deal of Sins Past. Like, who cares about the twins? Who cares if Spider-Man kissed Norman and Gwen's daughter? Who cares about their accelerated aging? People get angry at the story because they remember Gwen and Norman had sex. No ifs and buts about it.

  12. #42
    Spectacular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Posts
    177

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
    Having her back was the point of the whole exercise. Retconning Sins Past was just a requirement.
    Actually, the story would make perfect sense in this way: Norman and Warren clone Gwen because of her genes (and Warren's obsession with her). Norman wants a true heir and he uses Gwen's DNA to create two twins with Osborn's blood in them. Clone Conspiracy stated that the clones have the original person's soul, so the real Gwen has hallucinations about the twins and she gets convinced she had sex with Osborn (it's called False Pregnancy, women believe they are pregnant when they are not). From this point everything goes exactly as what we see in Sins Past: she confronts Osborn about the twins (he discovers that she knows about them because of the clone's soul) and he convinces her they had sex (so nobody will know about the clonation project) but also states he will kill her if she tries to take them from him. MJ hears everything and has the conversation in which Gwen tells a fake story (they never had sex but she thinks so) and that's it. Osborn kills her and years later Gabriel and Sarah come back.

  13. #43
    Spectacular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Posts
    177

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JTHM View Post
    Personally, I just can't buy Gwen sleeping with Norman at all. Does it make sense? I guess from a certain point of view, but that doesn't mean it does an irreparable damage to the character. To me, it just...I don't know, it doesn't work. Gwen cucked Peter with Norman Osborn. Saying it out loud just makes it seem how bad it is. Like, I am all onboard with giving the original Gwen flaws and traits of her own that distinguish her from the 'ideal girl' that she had become post-death. But like, again, there is a difference between that and literally making her sleep with Norman Osborn.

    And honestly, that's really the big deal of Sins Past. Like, who cares about the twins? Who cares if Spider-Man kissed Norman and Gwen's daughter? Who cares about their accelerated aging? People get angry at the story because they remember Gwen and Norman had sex. No ifs and buts about it.
    Yes, absolutely. And what infuriates me is reading JMS' interviews at the time where he states that whoever doesn't like the story is sexist and mysoginistic because girls have unfaithful sex all the time. Like that's a normal thing to do. JMS is a douche.

  14. #44
    Better than YOU! Alan2099's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    7,421

    Default

    And honestly, that's really the big deal of Sins Past. Like, who cares about the twins? Who cares if Spider-Man kissed Norman and Gwen's daughter? Who cares about their accelerated aging? People get angry at the story because they remember Gwen and Norman had sex. No ifs and buts about it.
    Let's not forget Norman's kid, one of the least original characters ever. He looks like Peter Parker and alternates between dressing like GI Joe's Snake Eyes and a black and white white of Green Goblin.

  15. #45
    Loony Scott Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Running Springs, California
    Posts
    9,336

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by federicodettofred View Post
    Yes, absolutely. And what infuriates me is reading JMS' interviews at the time where he states that whoever doesn't like the story is sexist and mysoginistic because girls have unfaithful sex all the time. Like that's a normal thing to do. JMS is a douche.
    Gwen and Peter were broken up when Sins Past happened, so she wasn't being unfaithful. And the reason she and Peter broke up and she went to Europe was that, to her perspective, Peter was being a douche to her after her father died.
    Last edited by Scott Taylor; 10-15-2020 at 03:23 PM.
    Every day is a gift, not a given right.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •