How does Marvel feel about the character of MJ?

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Another problem was that they tried to brainwash the fanbase in a sense by continuously stating things like "the marriage is holding us back"...."It limits him..." "It limits the stories we can tell". I'm still waiting for those amazing stories that can only be told through the eyes of an unmarried man child character.

Yeah that was basically attempting to gaslight the readership. And gaslighting the readership was something they had success in because Quesada and company, and especially Brevoort's asinine manifesto (which earns Jedi Master Luke Skywalker's astonishment for getting every single word wrong), spread a lot of misninformation and distortions about the character which I still see sprout and disperse online.

Slott did not have a good feel for the character. This is not to say that he doesn't know about Spider-man. Its obvious that the guy is a Spider nerd with endless knowledge on him. His skillset as a writer just never fit in well with the character.

It's possible to be a fan of something, to be passionate about something, and not be good at the thing you are passionate for. 'Wanting is better than having' and so on and so forth.

Personally I'm just not a fan of him as a person either and I've had back and forth conversations with him on a different website forum and his energy rubbed me completely the wrong way during those interactions as well.

Spencer has said that he has not given interviews or spoken much when taking over as lead Spider-Man writer, letting the work speak for itself. I kind of think that stance is a response to, not only Spencer's own bad experiences on social media and twitter when he wrote Cap but a response to the kind of outsize platform Slott tried to make for himself where he basically went on message boards and others and argued like any fan.

My issues with Slott's opinions was there seemed to be a general lack of conviction. By that I mean he had things both ways. So for instance when people criticized his Superior Ock for doing the story in a way that seemed to license his bad behavior, Slott would say that he intended readers to feel that way, to see that as subversive and challenge their identification. On the other hand if people praised Slott and said that they unironically liked Superior Ock and found him heroic, Slott would say that those people got his point and he was telling a story of redemption. Alan Moore has always corrected the record on Rorschach for instance. Whenever fans came up and said that Rorschach was their favorite hero or character, Moore would pause and raise an eyebrow and set the record that he intended Rorschach to be an interesting character who is tragic but not as any kind of hero you hold as a role model. Moore would reject praise if that countered his moral argument, whereas Slott never once tried to correct the record but always had things both ways. Because Moore has conviction. Gerry Conway is trying to reclaim The Punisher from his "Thin Blue Line" fanboys because he too has conviction.

[Scott Taylor]

I understand what you are saying.

BND was never going to succeed based on what it was following regardless of how good the stories were. Another problem was that they tried to brainwash the fanbase in a sense by continuously stating things like "the marriage is holding us back"...."It limits him..." "It limits the stories we can tell". I'm still waiting for those amazing stories that can only be told through the eyes of an unmarried man child character. Slott did not have a good feel for the character. This is not to say that he doesn't know about Spider-man. Its obvious that the guy is a Spider nerd with endless knowledge on him. His skillset as a writer just never fit in well with the character. Personally I'm just not a fan of him as a person either and I've had back and forth conversations with him on a different website forum and his energy rubbed me completely the wrong way during those interactions as well.

BND could have succeeded if the creative minds behind it hadn't been so mean spirited towards marriage fans. That attitude ended up turning away everyone, because people don't want to get beaten down and really don't generally want to see others get that treatment either.

[Lukmendes]

I understand what you are saying.

BND was never going to succeed based on what it was following regardless of how good the stories were.

I'll say this is somewhat true, because while OMD pissed off a lot of people, we still have fans who didn't really care about it, or even glad the marriage is gone, so if BND had good stories, we'd have those people praising it more, and over time, those stories could be more appreciated once the OMD hate was toned down.

So yeah, BND could have interesting stuff, which while it wouldn't be appreciated at first, it could later.

Of course, what we actually got was meh, I've seen BND being nicknamed "Bland New Day", and it's pretty fitting.

Another problem was that they tried to brainwash the fanbase in a sense by continuously stating things like "the marriage is holding us back"...."It limits him..." "It limits the stories we can tell". I'm still waiting for those amazing stories that can only be told through the eyes of an unmarried man child character.

One thing that makes it obvious how much they were gaslighting/lying is that Peter's social life got less focus (Something that's still happening in Spencer's run), and by focusing more on the super-hero side, his social life matters less, therefore, making him single or married makes less difference.

It's a lot like why New 52 failed, they had this awful story to change continuity (OMD/Flashpoint), for the sake of telling different stories, but there was no commitment, so we got this bad story that affects everything afterwards, no commitment to make this "new" status quo work, and a lot of mediocre stories in the way, which makes OMD/Flashpoint look even worse since they can be blamed for making those meh stories happen, which creates a vicious cycle.

Personally I'm just not a fan of him as a person either and I've had back and forth conversations with him on a different website forum and his energy rubbed me completely the wrong way during those interactions as well.

I'll say that while he could be a douche, there were plenty of fans who were obnoxious pieces of ****, so it can be understandable why his attitude could be like that.

Yeah that was basically attempting to gaslight the readership. And gaslighting the readership was something they had success in because Quesada and company, and especially Brevoort's asinine manifesto (which earns Jedi Master Luke Skywalker's astonishment for getting every single word wrong), spread a lot of misninformation and distortions about the character which I still see sprout and disperse online.

Probably had to do with confirmation bias, fans who didn't like the marriage, or who are annoyed at people who whine about OMD, will repeat those things just so they can be "right".

My issues with Slott's opinions was there seemed to be a general lack of conviction. By that I mean he had things both ways. So for instance when people criticized his Superior Ock for doing the story in a way that seemed to license his bad behavior, Slott would say that he intended readers to feel that way, to see that as subversive and challenge their identification. On the other hand if people praised Slott and said that they unironically liked Superior Ock and found him heroic, Slott would say that those people got his point and he was telling a story of redemption. Alan Moore has always corrected the record on Rorschach for instance. Whenever fans came up and said that Rorschach was their favorite hero or character, Moore would pause and raise an eyebrow and set the record that he intended Rorschach to be an interesting character who is tragic but not as any kind of hero you hold as a role model. Moore would reject praise if that countered his moral argument, whereas Slott never once tried to correct the record but always had things both ways. Because Moore has conviction. Gerry Conway is trying to reclaim The Punisher from his "Thin Blue Line" fanboys because he too has conviction.

Wonder how many fans like Snyder's version of Rorschach and aren't aware of the differences between the movie and comics, 'cause while the characters are very similar, there are noticeable differences, like how in the comic Rorschach says that Comedian raping that Laurie's mother was just a "Lapse of justice", pretty much showing how black and white he sees the world, and that line, and probably other similar ones, isn't in the movie lol.

Not that movie Rorschach is much of a role model, but he looks less bad when compared to the comic.

But yeah, if what you say about Slott is true, then it seems he wants to get the praise whenever possible, and saying two things that contradict each other like that, yeah...

BND could have succeeded if the creative minds behind it hadn't been so mean spirited towards marriage fans. That attitude ended up turning away everyone, because people don't want to get beaten down and really don't generally want to see others get that treatment either.

Yeah, Marvel certainly didn't help by allowing it for so long, right before Slott left he made that moment in ASM#796 where it looked like Peter and MJ would get back together (While not explaining why MJ got over the problems she had with the relationship), which was obvious bait, then we get #797, turns out, the obvious looking bait was really a bait as last "**** you" to Peter/MJ fans, sheesh...

[Mister Mets]

The company probably sees her as valuable. She's visually iconic and allows for stories that can appeal to female readers without discouraging male readers.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

BND could have succeeded if the creative minds behind it hadn't been so mean spirited towards marriage fans.

The final pages of OMD is a kind of Strike 1 against BND, before any writer started. This ending showed Peter at a party and suddenly they toast to a "brand new day" and it's sold as some happy moment, and Quesada wanted that to be the opening mood of the early stories. So they were down a strike before they began. Because they were trying to write a story entirely against the mood of the readership and the general audience. If the writers had freedom then they could have spun something similar to JMS' Coming Home...that story started with Peter at a low point with MJ and Peter separated, and her in LA. And yet COMING HOME and the stories leading from that felt good and positive. Of course it would have been repetitive and so on but the fact is that the stories needed to reflect that Peter's at a low point and not in a good place. The writers needed to be on board with what the readers felt, whereas the mandate for them was to write against how the readers felt.

Wonder how many fans like Snyder's version of Rorschach and aren't aware of the differences between the movie and comics, 'cause while the characters are very similar, there are noticeable differences, like how in the comic Rorschach says that Comedian raping that Laurie's mother was just a "Lapse of justice", pretty much showing how black and white he sees the world, and that line, and probably other similar ones, isn't in the movie lol.

The movie Rorschach is definitely more heroic and glamorized than the character in the comics. They dial down the rape apology, the support for New Frontiersman and so an alignment to extreme political views and sub rosa white supremacy. There's also the fact that Dan Dreiberg doesn't get a win by figuring out Adrian's scheme where Rorschach fails. The scene where Dan tells Rorschach that he's on the wrong path is missing. Malcolm Long, the great character as this flawed but well meaning psychiatrist is done real disservice in the movie, and his main point that the Rorschach blots mean nothing is removed.

Yeah, Marvel certainly didn't help by allowing it for so long, right before Slott left he made that moment in ASM#796 where it looked like Peter and MJ would get back together (While not explaining why MJ got over the problems she had with the relationship), which was obvious bait, then we get #797, turns out, the obvious looking bait was really a bait as last "**** you" to Peter/MJ fans, sheesh...

In retrospect, Slott was kind of teasing and setting up the possibility of the characters hooking up again. Spencer remember had already signed up to take over and his plans for his early issues were known to Slott and others, so Slott had to make sure that the characters at the end of the run could be where Spencer could take them.

[Lukmendes]

The movie Rorschach is definitely more heroic and glamorized than the character in the comics. They dial down the rape apology, the support for New Frontiersman and so an alignment to extreme political views and sub rosa white supremacy. There's also the fact that Dan Dreiberg doesn't get a win by figuring out Adrian's scheme where Rorschach fails. The scene where Dan tells Rorschach that he's on the wrong path is missing.

Yeah, the movie tried to make him be more like Batman, pretty sure he was even a better fighter there, so toning down his bad morals is really expected.

Hell, did they even include the "long handshake" scene? 'cause if not they legit made him less human lol.

Malcolm Long, the great character as this flawed but well meaning psychiatrist is done real disservice in the movie, and his main point that the Rorschach blots mean nothing is removed.

Honestly, while I see the point of Malcolm, I thought his scene in the comic was just stupid, someone like Rorschach is gonna make a probably veteran psychiatrist have a mental breakdown like that? His past and mentality aren't even that fucked up, really makes it look like the guy is a novice in all of that, or somehow didn't deal with the really bad criminals until Rorschach.

Not saying this justifies his character being screwed over lol.

In retrospect, Slott was kind of teasing and setting up the possibility of the characters hooking up again. Spencer remember had already signed up to take over and his plans for his early issues were known to Slott and others, so Slott had to make sure that the characters at the end of the run could be where Spencer could take them.

That's honestly a really bad way to do it then, 'cause it makes MJ look like a bitch once again who can't get over Peter being Spidey, when in the issue right before that she said she missed it, then suddenly in ASM#1 she's okay with it and has the audacity to say "We're in this together Pete. We always have been.", like the whole rejection from ASM#797 didn't happen? Yeah... It would look better if that whole scene didn't happen, 'cause what Slott did makes it look like they wouldn't get together in the next run, at least for a while, which admittedly, I thought it'd be the case, then ASM#1 happened and I was confused.

[Spidey_62]

I still remember the discomfort a lot of people expressed online when the first page of the first issue of BND was previewed online immediately showing readers Peter making out with a random lady right away. That was kinda dirty on them right out of the gate for the readers unhappy about OMD but trying to give BND a fair shot.

[RD155]

I still remember the discomfort a lot of people expressed online when the first page of the first issue of BND was previewed online immediately showing readers Peter making out with a random lady right away. That was kinda dirty on them right out of the gate for the readers unhappy about OMD but trying to give BND a fair shot.

Was that the first page? I vaguely remember that...I thought the first page was some imposter Spider-Man robbing someone and saying “shut the *@!* up and give me your money “. Always felt like Slott was talking directly to the reader with that.

The arrogance jumping off those panels and slapping the reader directly in the face still leaves a bitter taste in my mouth.

[Lukmendes]

Was that the first page? I vaguely remember that...I thought the first page was some imposter Spider-Man robbing someone and saying “shut the *@!* up and give me your money “. Always felt like Slott was talking directly to the reader with that.

The arrogance jumping off those panels and slapping the reader directly in the face still leaves a bitter taste in my mouth.

The one you're mentioning is the second page lol.





(ASM#546)

Kinda funny the first two pages set the mood for this status quo, not in a good way lol.

Like, man, the way Peter is talking in the narration in that first page, he sounds like some teenager... Which doesn't work because he's not a teenager, and he didn't talk like that when he was one, they really were trying very hard to push this "youthful" Peter, but considering this came right after OMD, yeah...

[Spidey_62]

I can kinda see from their perspective right then would have been the time to do those tongue-in-cheek things with the new status quo throwing it right in your face cause it was the opposite of what preceded it but at the same time there's also the matter of knowing when to show some restraint and not go for the obvious low blows that will rub the established readers the wrong way.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Yeah, the movie tried to make him be more like Batman, pretty sure he was even a better fighter there, so toning down his bad morals is really expected.

Hell, did they even include the "long handshake" scene? 'cause if not they legit made him less human lol.

Yeah they did. Zack Snyder is a real "no homo" kind of guy, at least aesthetically if not politically (he's for Biden in fact).

Honestly, while I see the point of Malcolm, I thought his scene in the comic was just stupid, someone like Rorschach is gonna make a probably veteran psychiatrist have a mental breakdown like that? His past and mentality aren't even that fucked up, really makes it look like the guy is a novice in all of that, or somehow didn't deal with the really bad criminals until Rorschach.

Malcolm was a stuffy middle-class psychologist who wanted to review Walter because he thought it might increase his profile. And meeting Rorschach and hearing his story and his reaction to that, made him realize what real humanity was all about. Moore said that in his view, Malcolm when he intervened in the fight and said, "In this weird helping one another is what counts" (or words to that effect), he had become a truer hero than any supe. That point doesn't come across in the movie where the non-powered side characters get shuffled out of sight and de-emphasized.

That's honestly a really bad way to do it then, 'cause it makes MJ look like a bitch once again who can't get over Peter being Spidey, when in the issue right before that she said she missed it, then suddenly in ASM#1 she's okay with it and has the audacity to say "We're in this together Pete. We always have been.", like the whole rejection from ASM#797 didn't happen?

Well in the final issues, MJ does help Peter take down Carnage-Goblin at the tower, and when Peter warns everyone close to him she does huff when Peter doesn't entirely put her at #1. Slott always wrote women as Tsundere types, that was his basic default. Granted those issues don't register as memorably as that rejection but that goes to show how Slott's dishy moments tend to stick far more than the moments that swing up...it's why the stuff that sticks out in Superior Ock and what geared that ongoing is everything coming Otto's way and not his comeuppance. Slott always puts more energy in the humiliation and degradation than in the reverse, which is part of the insincerity and cynicism in his run.

I still remember the discomfort a lot of people expressed online when the first page of the first issue of BND was previewed online immediately showing readers Peter making out with a random lady right away. That was kinda dirty on them right out of the gate for the readers unhappy about OMD but trying to give BND a fair shot.

I can kinda see from their perspective right then would have been the time to do those tongue-in-cheek things with the new status quo throwing it right in your face cause it was the opposite of what preceded it but at the same time there's also the matter of knowing when to show some restraint and not go for the obvious low blows that will rub the established readers the wrong way.

Those first issues of BND are a good case of people failing to read the room and it just confirmed the Middle-Aged Biker Gang nostalgia behind the entire entreprise. Tom Brevoort and others compared the backlash to OMD to The Night Gwen Stacy Died. In their minds that story is controversial and so good, and not good and controversial which shows the problem there. Conway didn't like Gwen Stacy as a character but he still was respectful. However he felt behind the scenes, he didn't go from Gwen's death to Peter and MJ making out on the funeral (for an example of how that might have worked, look up Grant Morrison's final issue of New X-Men). Gwen died and he spent many issues dealing with Peter's grief and slowly cheering the character up from a down moment. So Conway acknowledged how readers felt and wrote stories according to that.

[WebLurker]

If there was a major story on the order of the MP Saga or KLH, that would have worked out. An essential Spider-Man story recognized as such by everyone. BND didn't really give that out of the gate.

Maybe? I know next to nothing about the era (way out of my area of interest) beyond that the OMD backlash hadn't died down and it still seems to have a mixed reception (which seems to be part lingering OMD resentment from those who won't let that go and part due to multiple writers with a lack of direction, from my limited observations).

If you are a writer and you get a chance to write ASM, then it's a gig that's hard to turn down. Amazing Spider-Man draws more eyes than any other Marvel title, more civilian eyes. The readership of Spider-Man more than any other Marvel title, includes people who will not go on and read other Marvel titles, or read other comics. It's often the introduction to the superhero genre for many people starting to read comics for the first time. For any writer who works on Spider-Man, that's the biggest readership they will ever have. It's a high from which you can never come down.

So again you have to feel for the BND writers in terms of the fact that they got a big gig and they have to do it in a period which no fault of their own, will always be the least charismatic, least loved, least read, and least revisited period in Spider-Man publication history.

Didn't Slott get his start in BND before he he was given charge of the whole thing? He, at least, got his chance to get his fanbase, I guess. It is hard to have to work on an unpopular part of a franchise where some consumers are going to be unhappy with you for something you didn't do. At this point, so many years removed, though, I wonder how many of those writers are seriously bothered that their runs aren't considered among the greats? I mean, it would seem like now, it's more relevant to their resumes then anything else, where fan love isn't as relevant as the experience and whether they got their work in on time.

[PCN24454]

It’s sad to see that the Spider-Tracer story line didn’t count as an essential story.

It’s especially sad considering how boring and pointless KLH was.

[Agent Z]

Yeah that was basically attempting to gaslight the readership. And gaslighting the readership was something they had success in because Quesada and company, and especially Brevoort's asinine manifesto (which earns Jedi Master Luke Skywalker's astonishment for getting every single word wrong), spread a lot of misninformation and distortions about the character which I still see sprout and disperse online.



It's possible to be a fan of something, to be passionate about something, and not be good at the thing you are passionate for. 'Wanting is better than having' and so on and so forth.



Spencer has said that he has not given interviews or spoken much when taking over as lead Spider-Man writer, letting the work speak for itself. I kind of think that stance is a response to, not only Spencer's own bad experiences on social media and twitter when he wrote Cap but a response to the kind of outsize platform Slott tried to make for himself where he basically went on message boards and others and argued like any fan.

My issues with Slott's opinions was there seemed to be a general lack of conviction. By that I mean he had things both ways. So for instance when people criticized his Superior Ock for doing the story in a way that seemed to license his bad behavior, Slott would say that he intended readers to feel that way, to see that as subversive and challenge their identification. On the other hand if people praised Slott and said that they unironically liked Superior Ock and found him heroic, Slott would say that those people got his point and he was telling a story of redemption. Alan Moore has always corrected the record on Rorschach for instance. Whenever fans came up and said that Rorschach was their favorite hero or character, Moore would pause and raise an eyebrow and set the record that he intended Rorschach to be an interesting character who is tragic but not as any kind of hero you hold as a role model. Moore would reject praise if that countered his moral argument, whereas Slott never once tried to correct the record but always had things both ways. Because Moore has conviction. Gerry Conway is trying to reclaim The Punisher from his "Thin Blue Line" fanboys because he too has conviction.

Those two opinions don't seem quite contradictory to me. Just because Ock does something bad doesn't mean we are supposed to approve of it and redemption stories do still have the protagonists struggle with doing something wrong. Whether or not Slott handled this well is another question.

[BooCoo]

As a separate character she's reasonably interesting but not exceptional or irreplaceable. It's all about the writing. I think the "Love of MJ" is more a function of her relationship with Peter rather than her as a person.