Page 104 of 137 FirstFirst ... 45494100101102103104105106107108114 ... LastLast
Results 1,546 to 1,560 of 2044
  1. #1546
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    492

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post

    Why are Aunt May and Madame web in...oh God .
    Can’t speak for Madame Web, but Peter did choose Aunt May over married happiness with MJ so….hmmm.

    indeed.

  2. #1547
    Spectacular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2022
    Posts
    154

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Rat View Post
    The likes of MC2 and RYV MJ laugh in your face.

    Also, editorial would never allow Peter and MJ to divorce if they hadn't gone through with this, Peter's a role model, a hero, they overcome their difficulties, they teach us to be better and to cherish the people we love, and not to take our partners for granted. JMS wrote the most powerful marriage story Marvel ever put out to demonstrate that, as did Fraction. These two would never divorce. It had to have been something greater than conventional means, or nothing at all.



    Most female characters aren't Mary Jane Watson.
    Well then. While they laugh, I will thank the co-writers who helped him make their characterization possible. Slott was damn good plotter and could do characterization, but he heavily favored one over the other, particularly when he had to make deadlines or thought it made a great story and pretend otherwise is revisionism. Felicia Hardy, Ben Reilly, and Phil Urich, are just three examples.



    People lean too intensely into "BND MJ the terrible". Mary Jane made a few mistakes that should be acknowledged, but she's not an irredeemable person or close to it. Unconditional love should not mean unconditional tolerance. I remember Mary Jane having insecurities and well-earned doubts about their relationship. I also remember him hitting a pregnant MJ in the middle of a breakdown. We all know how Marvel characterized a similar situation with Hank Pym. Peter Parker's choices during civil war are enough of an excuse for a breakup. He unmasked in front of the entire world, putting a target on every person with whom he interacted. Even with the scarce knowledge we have of what the pro-Registration side required, This decision was unnecessary. Next, he takes his family out of the protection of the Avengers after endangering them. Then he had them go on the run with him from the government and the enemies he'd made that were working for the side he now opposed, which resulted in the logical conclusion of May Parker getting shot. If she had pulled through or not, it would logically put the marriage in question since Mary Jane can no longer trust his judgment. MJ isn't only in this marriage to have kids, but she eventually wants them. She knows what it's like to lose her baby to a villain. Aunt May's shooting would be a wake-up call for Mary Jane. It would cause her to rethink whether she could bring a helpless child into the world where her husband might do something so reckless and flip-flop between sides because Peter hadn't fully understood what he was getting into before he did it. I'm not saying she'd think, "Oh, how horrible of you, Peter." That would not be her. I'm saying MJ would respect his morals and stick by Spider-man as a friend, but it could be in-character that he'd have to earn that trust back before MJ has Peter as a husband and lover. It would have been an unpopular but logical response to an OOC choice. Marvel didn't divorce the couple because they felt an official split would have aged Peter Parker. The civil war event was so miswritten we don't know what it was even about. Instead, rampant mischaracterization, Nazi metaphors, barely considered civil rights analogies, anti-gun control parallelism, and anti-accountability conceit were the order of the day. Nobody should have supported it as it was portrayed. I'd have liked a story about Peter Parker slowly earning his way back into Mary Jane Watson's life far more than anything we've gotten from Mephisto. I do not think Mary Jane Watson is in character but it's not the devil's fault. Slott could have written her more faithfully. Mephisto emboldens writers who think he gives them an excuse enough for butchering these characters, but he is just a symptom of a more deadly disease. Editorial's stance on "Peter the Younger" is damaging this franchise.

  3. #1548
    Formerly Assassin Spider Huntsman Spider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    New Jersey, U.S.A.
    Posts
    15,240

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tabs View Post
    Well then. While they laugh, I will thank the co-writers who helped him make their characterization possible. Slott was damn good plotter and could do characterization, but he heavily favored one over the other, particularly when he had to make deadlines or thought it made a great story and pretend otherwise is revisionism. Felicia Hardy, Ben Reilly, and Phil Urich, are just three examples.



    People lean too intensely into "BND MJ the terrible". Mary Jane made a few mistakes that should be acknowledged, but she's not an irredeemable person or close to it. Unconditional love should not mean unconditional tolerance. I remember Mary Jane having insecurities and well-earned doubts about their relationship. I also remember him hitting a pregnant MJ in the middle of a breakdown. We all know how Marvel characterized a similar situation with Hank Pym. Peter Parker's choices during civil war are enough of an excuse for a breakup. He unmasked in front of the entire world, putting a target on every person with whom he interacted. Even with the scarce knowledge we have of what the pro-Registration side required, This decision was unnecessary. Next, he takes his family out of the protection of the Avengers after endangering them. Then he had them go on the run with him from the government and the enemies he'd made that were working for the side he now opposed, which resulted in the logical conclusion of May Parker getting shot. If she had pulled through or not, it would logically put the marriage in question since Mary Jane can no longer trust his judgment. MJ isn't only in this marriage to have kids, but she eventually wants them. She knows what it's like to lose her baby to a villain. Aunt May's shooting would be a wake-up call for Mary Jane. It would cause her to rethink whether she could bring a helpless child into the world where her husband might do something so reckless and flip-flop between sides because Peter hadn't fully understood what he was getting into before he did it. I'm not saying she'd think, "Oh, how horrible of you, Peter." That would not be her. I'm saying MJ would respect his morals and stick by Spider-man as a friend, but it could be in-character that he'd have to earn that trust back before MJ has Peter as a husband and lover. It would have been an unpopular but logical response to an OOC choice. Marvel didn't divorce the couple because they felt an official split would have aged Peter Parker. The civil war event was so miswritten we don't know what it was even about. Instead, rampant mischaracterization, Nazi metaphors, barely considered civil rights analogies, anti-gun control parallelism, and anti-accountability conceit were the order of the day. Nobody should have supported it as it was portrayed. I'd have liked a story about Peter Parker slowly earning his way back into Mary Jane Watson's life far more than anything we've gotten from Mephisto. I do not think Mary Jane Watson is in character but it's not the devil's fault. Slott could have written her more faithfully. Mephisto emboldens writers who think he gives them an excuse enough for butchering these characters, but he is just a symptom of a more deadly disease. Editorial's stance on "Peter the Younger" is damaging this franchise.
    And while trying to outright kill Ben Reilly for "stealing his life," which MJ was trying to stop him from doing because she knew once he came to his damned senses, he'd regret doing that for the rest of his life, no less. As for Civil War, in retrospect, that was a badly thought-out allegory for post-9/11 America where, in at least some minds, "Americans chose security over liberty and ended up with neither," given that whole era's culmination in Dark Reign as led by Norman Osborn, the very villain whose machinations did cost Mary Jane her baby in the first place. Your last statement is definitely on-point, vis-a-vis Marvel editorial.
    The spider is always on the hunt.

  4. #1549
    The Superior One Celgress's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    10,647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lukmendes View Post
    So who should be the next villain to rip off Kraven's Last Hunt? Don't say Norman, that's too obvious.

    Then again, maybe too obvious is the answer...
    Nah, Norman has effectively been reduced to Mephisto's stooge via retcon so "Mephisto's Last Deal" perhaps?
    "So you've come to the end now alive but dead inside."

  5. #1550
    Extraordinary Member Lukmendes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    5,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TinkerSpider View Post
    Can’t speak for Madame Web, but Peter did choose Aunt May over married happiness with MJ so….hmmm.

    indeed.
    Spidey does consider Madame Web to be a friend but uh... Not like that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Celgress View Post
    Nah, Norman has effectively been reduced to Mephisto's stooge via retcon so "Mephisto's Last Deal" perhaps?
    Mephisto replacing Spidey in any way for a while sounds hilarious, I'm in lol.
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCape View Post
    We all know that BND was a collective mid-life crisis from Marvel back then

  6. #1551
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    86,843

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lukmendes View Post
    Spidey does consider Madame Web to be a friend but uh... Not like that.
    I'll never forget the 90's cartoon where she Joan Lee and would never leave him alone .

  7. #1552
    Spectacular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2022
    Posts
    154

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Huntsman Spider View Post
    And while trying to outright kill Ben Reilly for "stealing his life," which MJ was trying to stop him from doing because she knew once he came to his damned senses, he'd regret doing that for the rest of his life, no less. As for Civil War, in retrospect, that was a badly thought-out allegory for post-9/11 America where, in at least some minds, "Americans chose security over liberty and ended up with neither," given that whole era's culmination in Dark Reign as led by Norman Osborn, the very villain whose machinations did cost Mary Jane her baby in the first place. Your last statement is definitely on-point, vis-a-vis Marvel editorial.
    Thank you. I usually pretend that story doesn't exist, but I can't agree that Peter has never given Mary Jane canon reason to reconsider their life together. I understand the complaints over BND MJ's portrayal and share many of them. She's OOC. I agree. What I can't agree on is that Mary Jane is now a bad person. That life is extremely difficult and even the strongest person is entitled to doubts. Peter thought about retiring often enough.

    Wow. That reminds me how much introspective writing we missed because Marvel realized they could use an established villain of Peter Parker, a hero who supported Registration before he was against it, as a shadow archetype for Tony Stark. All she had to do was turn on the TV and there's the person responsible for destroying her life and the lives of everyone in the coffee bean gang. The public knows Osborn killed people yet the green goblin is treated like a hero by almost everyone on national television. If I were in comics, I'd have J.M. DeMatteis to write a flashback one-shot from her perspective. Mary Jane's life f***ing sucks.
    Last edited by Tabs; 05-19-2022 at 09:38 PM.

  8. #1553
    Extraordinary Member Lukmendes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    5,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    I'll never forget the 90's cartoon where she Joan Lee and would never leave him alone .
    90's cartoon was an odd adaptation of her, I think she was the same type of being as Beyonder too lol.

    Meanwhile, Cassandra in the comics is friendly and doesn't even show up that much, when she does she tries to be helpful, so yeah, Spidey seeing her as a friend is fine, but not like that cover implies lol.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tabs View Post
    Thank you. I usually pretend that story doesn't exist, but I can't agree that Peter has never given Mary Jane canon reason to reconsider their life together. I understand the complaints over BND MJ's portrayal and share many of them. She's OOC. I agree. What I can't agree on is that Mary Jane is now a bad person. That life is extremely difficult and even the strongest person is entitled to doubts. Peter thought about retiring often enough.
    The problem is, they don't use anything like that for MJ to move away from him, she blames him for what his enemies do then moves away, basically doing victim blaming instead of actually pointing out that Spidey himself has made dumb bullshit, and treats him like dirt just because he's near her.

    They could've made it more understandable for her to move away, and they didn't, they just needed her to be a bitch here and there, and that sucks.
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCape View Post
    We all know that BND was a collective mid-life crisis from Marvel back then

  9. #1554
    The Superior One Celgress's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    10,647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lukmendes View Post
    Spidey does consider Madame Web to be a friend but uh... Not like that.



    Mephisto replacing Spidey in any way for a while sounds hilarious, I'm in lol.
    If we get Mephisto out of Peter's life for good afterward, I'm also in lol.
    "So you've come to the end now alive but dead inside."

  10. #1555
    Spectacular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2022
    Posts
    154

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lukmendes View Post

    The problem is, they don't use anything like that for MJ to move away from him, she blames him for what his enemies do then moves away, basically doing victim blaming instead of actually pointing out that Spidey himself has made dumb bullshit, and treats him like dirt just because he's near her.

    They could've made it more understandable for her to move away, and they didn't, they just needed her to be a bitch here and there, and that sucks.
    The writing does victim-blame. How Mary Jane Watson is written is often not how she would behave. Any person can decide when they want to check out of a relationship if it gets too dangerous. If she wasn't MJ I wouldn't think twice about it. That's their prerogative. Unfortunately, that is Mary Jane and she has a wealth of resources documenting how she would respond to danger. The writing is not self-aware enough to realize when Peter's behaving in ways that would reasonably cause people to alienate Peter Parker because he's treated as a power fantasy in one minute and Charlie Brown the next. Slott wrote what incels intended the word "Chad" to define. Infuriatingly, Gage contrasted him to the Virgin Doctor Octavius. I remember someone being disturbingly intrigued by her "assets", for example.
    Last edited by Tabs; 05-19-2022 at 10:31 PM.

  11. #1556
    Extraordinary Member Lukmendes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    5,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Celgress View Post
    If we get Mephisto out of Peter's life for good afterward, I'm also in lol.
    Sure, but "for good" will mean "until the next writer decides to use him" .

    Quote Originally Posted by Tabs View Post
    The writing does victim-blame. How Mary Jane Watson is written is often not how she would behave. Any person can decide when they want to check out of a relationship if it gets too dangerous. If she wasn't MJ I wouldn't think twice about it. That's their prerogative. Unfortunately, that is Mary Jane and she has a wealth of resources documenting how she would respond to danger. The writing is not self-aware enough to realize when Peter's behaving in ways that would reasonably cause people to alienate Peter Parker because he's treated as a power fantasy in one minute and Charlie Brown the next. Slott wrote what incels intended the word "Chad" to define. Infuriatingly, Gage contrasted him to the Virgin Doctor Octavius. I remember someone being disturbingly intrigued by her "assets", for example.
    While Gage is a better character writer, he follows the same mentality as Slott about Spidey and his world, so he'll shit on Spidey on occasion, not really surprising.

    I mean shit, Gage in Superior vol 2 had Anna Maria point out that Otto is the kind of guy who sees women for what they actually are instead of dating model-like women like Spidey, this, the same guy who jacked off to Spidey's memories about MJ (Though Anna Maria is likely not aware of that, it is stupid she's talking shit about Spidey to pretend Otto is better in that trait), and Anna Maria was also the one who had to insist for Spidey to date Bobbi I think.

    It's pretty dumb, to put it lightly.
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCape View Post
    We all know that BND was a collective mid-life crisis from Marvel back then

  12. #1557
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    492

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lukmendes View Post

    While Gage is a better character writer, he follows the same mentality as Slott about Spidey and his world, so he'll shit on Spidey on occasion, not really surprising.

    I mean shit, Gage in Superior vol 2 had Anna Maria point out that Otto is the kind of guy who sees women for what they actually are instead of dating model-like women like Spidey, this, the same guy who jacked off to Spidey's memories about MJ (Though Anna Maria is likely not aware of that, it is stupid she's talking shit about Spidey to pretend Otto is better in that trait), and Anna Maria was also the one who had to insist for Spidey to date Bobbi I think.

    It's pretty dumb, to put it lightly.
    Slott writes ham-fisted, stilted and on the nose dialogue.

    Gage writes more natural-sounding dialogue - he’s a TV writer, after all. And that makes his issues more enjoyable to read.

    But they both suck at characterization. Although the Anna Maria/MJ example is such a Slott thing - he called Peter dating conventionally attractive women “anti-Marvel” - that I have to wonder if Gage was scripting while closely adhering to a Slott plott.

  13. #1558
    Extraordinary Member Lukmendes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    5,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TinkerSpider View Post
    Slott writes ham-fisted, stilted and on the nose dialogue.
    Yeah I hear he did parodies more, think he even started in Ren and Stimpy comics? His dialogue and characterization isn't out of place in exaggerated comedy.

    Gage writes more natural-sounding dialogue - he’s a TV writer, after all. And that makes his issues more enjoyable to read.
    Wasn't aware of that.

    But they both suck at characterization. Although the Anna Maria/MJ example is such a Slott thing - he called Peter dating conventionally attractive women “anti-Marvel” - that I have to wonder if Gage was scripting while closely adhering to a Slott plott.
    The "Anti-Marvel" thing was about attractive women in general and not just MJ? 'Cause Spidey has been dating hot women since Betty, so uh, Ditko is Anti-Marvel? Stan Lee made a point to Gwen more beautiful than MJ, so is Stan Lee Anti-Marvel? And is bad haircut MJ "true" Marvel?

    Seriously, if that's legit, just another Slott logic that I can't comprehend...
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCape View Post
    We all know that BND was a collective mid-life crisis from Marvel back then

  14. #1559
    Mighty Member Minerboh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    1,848

    Default

    Kind of wondering...
    Was there any drawing of Ditko featuring Mary Jane's FULL appearance?
    I mean, the only time I remember MJ under Ditko was a cameo with her face hidden.

  15. #1560
    Extraordinary Member Lukmendes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    5,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Minerboh View Post
    Kind of wondering...
    Was there any drawing of Ditko featuring Mary Jane's FULL appearance?
    I mean, the only time I remember MJ under Ditko was a cameo with her face hidden.
    Nope, and the one time we see MJ in ASM#25, she dresses in a significantly more covered way than what she wears afterwards.

    He might've made a drawing of what she looks like, but if he did, wasn't made public as far as I'm aware.
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCape View Post
    We all know that BND was a collective mid-life crisis from Marvel back then

Posting Permissions

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