The C2E2 Spider-man 60th Panel, some interesting things been said.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

If sales dropped after OMD, logic suggests that OMD was the cause of the drop, and that undoing it is likely to undo that as well. That doesn't sound at all like a stretch to me.

It's also not hard to imagine how the pre-OMD Spider-Man (competent, with MJ) would sell better than the post-OMD one (incompetent, without MJ).

We see it in the adaptations too. Two out of the last three major recent adaptations are ITSV and the Insomniac games, and they have a version of Peter that's more like the pre-OMD one (competent and with MJ). The third is MCU Spider-Man, who is halfway there (incompetent but with MJ...okay, not right now, but by the next film).

[RJT]

If sales dropped after OMD, logic suggests that OMD was the cause of the drop, and that undoing it is likely to undo that as well. That doesn't sound at all like a stretch to me.

It's also not hard to imagine how the pre-OMD Spider-Man (competent, with MJ) would sell better than the post-OMD one (incompetent, without MJ).

We see it in the adaptations too. Two out of the last three major recent adaptations are ITSV and the Insomniac games, and they have a version of Peter that's more like the pre-OMD one (competent and with MJ). The third is MCU Spider-Man, who is halfway there (incompetent but with MJ...okay, not right now, but by the next film).

So will it be a 100% increase? Or a 200% increase? More?

And I love how far you have to grasp to justify your position. The MCU Spider-Man movies "count" because he may someday be with a character who is in no way Mary Jane Watson, not in name, appearance, or personality, but is a win for you because her first name starts with an "M."

[Kevinroc]

So will it be a 100% increase? Or a 200% increase? More?

And I love how far you have to grasp to justify your position. The MCU Spider-Man movies "count" because he may someday be with a character who is in no way Mary Jane Watson, not in name, appearance, or personality, but is a win for you because her first name starts with an "M."

I wouldn't bring up the MCU movies either (because they do go out of their way to do the whole High School Spider-Man thing all over again), but I am going to point out that those movies go out of their way to refer to her as "MJ" and "MJ Watson" at least 95% of the time and all but spell out that she is a multiversal variant of Mary Jane, and point to "MJ" as a multiversal constant in Peter's life (to indicate that Andrew Garfield's Peter will meet his world's MJ and fall in love again).

I'd have preferred they'd handled the whole thing differently, but it is what it is. Pretending MCU MJ is somehow a different character completely is disingenuous when NWH spells it all out pretty clearly.

Again, this feels more like it's ABOUT the relationship with MJ in general as opposed to being a marriage discussion.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

So will it be a 100% increase? Or a 200% increase? More?

I think this is a semantics game.

And I love how far you have to grasp to justify your position. The MCU Spider-Man movies "count" because he may someday be with a character who is in no way Mary Jane Watson, not in name, appearance, or personality, but is a win for you because her first name starts with an "M."

Post-NWH especially, "MJ" is clearly the MCU variant of the MJ everyone is thinking of. In spite of all the differences you pointed out.

[WebLurker]

I think I agree with previous posters that if (big if) Marvel was to undo OMD and/or bring the marriage back, they would make a big deal of it and market it as a "must read" event. How many paying customers would care or pick up the series as a result of bringing back this status quo is something I don't think we can guess until we see it play out in real life.

The MCU Spider-Man movies "count" because he may someday be with a character who is in no way Mary Jane Watson, not in name, appearance, or personality, but is a win for you because her first name starts with an "M."

She's a variant of the traditional Mary Jane (part of her surname is "Watson," for pete's sake), that has been made clear. A very heavily reimagined variant, but still a variant (if Loki can be a gator in another reality, MJ can be an introverted gal with a unique view of the world in this one).

Besides, it's not the first time that a character has been overhauled from the ground up and we still accept them as being a variant or adaptation of the same character. MCU Hope van Dyne is one of the heroes and romantically involved with Scott Lang, while her comic counterpart was a villain and part of the same generation as his daughter. M'Baku and Nakia from Black Panther were also upgraded from comic book villains to heroic characters. Heck, going back to Mary Jane herself, her Raimi counterpart went to high school with Peter, was shown to have a more serious personality, didn't have siblings, didn't learn that Peter was Spider-Man until he told her, took Gwen's place as the woman Green Goblin tried to throw off a bridge, was Peter's first and only serious relationship, etc.

[Kevinroc]

Beyond the alligator Loki, one of the show's leads was a woman with blonde hair named Sylvie, but she was absolutely meant to be her universe's Loki and the show said as such.

[Lee]

I don't think MCU MJ is a good representation of the comic character. They don't really have anything in common besides a nickname and being Spider-Man's girlfriend. Even MCU Flash Thompson was a closer adaptation.

Maybe they should introduce Michelle "MJ" Jones into the comic and have her marry Peter.

[Frontier]

I don't think MCU MJ is a good representation of the comic character. They don't really have anything in common besides a nickname and being Spider-Man's girlfriend. Even MCU Flash Thompson was a closer adaptation.

Maybe they should introduce Michelle "MJ" Jones into the comic and have her marry Peter.

I don't know if that's fair. I'd say she's about on par with Flash as far as being comic accurate (which isn't saying much).

She still has that emotional grounding aspect, instead of the party girl facade it's her disinterested and apathetic persona (but it was there).

The creators knew what they were doing with her nickname even if they handled it very clunky.

[RJT]

I think this is a semantics game.

It's not semantics. You keep telling everyone that OMD is "clearly" responsible for a loss in sales, but are much less bullish on the idea that undoing OMD will "clearly" significantly increase sales because the truth is you know it isn't true. Most fans do not care about the marriage one way or the other. They like reading Spider-Man comics.

Post-NWH especially, "MJ" is clearly the MCU variant of the MJ everyone is thinking of. In spite of all the differences you pointed out.

https://www.ign.com/articles/2017/07...cters-nickname

"Clearly" the MCU variant of MJ everyone is thinking of. Except the producers say definitively she's not. And she has a different name, and a different personality and backstory. She is not an aspiring model/actress with an outgoing personality; she's a moody, sarcastic member of the Academic Decathalon team. The actress herself said she was inspired by Ally Sheedy's character from "The Breakfast Club." You couldn't get much further than Mary Jane Watson than that.
If the characteristics of MJ are so mutable that you can change her appearance, name, personality, and backstory and still claim she's the same, is she really all that great of a character?

I really like Mary Jane as a character. I think the story where she reveals that she has known that Peter was Spider-man for a while, and then also reveals the painful backstory of her father and sister was a terrific piece of character work by Tom DeFalco and Ron Frenz.
What I don't like is how they had to ignore or change a lot of her characteristics while writing her as Peter's wife. I wonder if you consider Michelle Jones to be the same as Mary Jane Watson, if you're really as big a fan as you claim you are.

[Kevinroc]

https://www.ign.com/articles/2017/07...cters-nickname

"Clearly" the MCU variant of MJ everyone is thinking of. Except the producers say definitively she's not. And she has a different name, and a different personality and backstory. She is not an aspiring model/actress with an outgoing personality; she's a moody, sarcastic member of the Academic Decathalon team. The actress herself said she was inspired by Ally Sheedy's character from "The Breakfast Club." You couldn't get much further than Mary Jane Watson than that.

That's from 2017.

If the characteristics of MJ are so mutable that you can change her appearance, name, personality, and backstory and still claim she's the same, is she really all that great of a character?

I really like Mary Jane as a character. I think the story where she reveals that she has known that Peter was Spider-man for a while, and then also reveals the painful backstory of her father and sister was a terrific piece of character work by Tom DeFalco and Ron Frenz.
What I don't like is how they had to ignore or change a lot of her characteristics while writing her as Peter's wife. I wonder if you consider Michelle Jones to be the same as Mary Jane Watson, if you're really as big a fan as you claim you are.

I mean, Peter Parker isn't kissing Tony Stark's ass in the comics. Does he need to do that? Is Peter Parker really that great a character if they have to change him so much that he needs to be a fanboy of Tony Stark?

[Frontier]

I mean, so many of MCU Spider-Man's supporting characters were "in-name-only" but there's really not much arguing with making the main love interest called "MJ" and giving her "Watson" as a last name.

[Kevinroc]

I mean, so many of MCU Spider-Man's supporting characters were "in-name-only" but there's really not much arguing with making the main love interest called "MJ" and giving her "Watson" as a last name.

MCU Romances in general are pretty terrible. She just goes "my friends call me MJ" as a last minute reveal to cue the audience in on who she is and then two movies later they hastily retcon her last name to say she is "MJ Watson" and have Raimi Norman and Peter equate her to Raimi Mary Jane. Garfield's Peter tries to equate her to Gwen, just being Spidey's girlfriend, until Maguire's Peter reveals he's in a relationship with a woman called MJ, distinctly painting "Peter x MJ" as a multiverse constant and strongly implying Garfield's Peter will eventually meet his world's MJ.

(That's definitely a great set-up for a romcom, but it's never gonna happen. If we ever see Garfield's Peter again, like in Secret Wars, I expect he'll say he's met his world's MJ.)

[RJT]

That's from 2017.



I mean, Peter Parker isn't kissing Tony Stark's ass in the comics. Does he need to do that? Is Peter Parker really that great a character if they have to change him so much that he needs to be a fanboy of Tony Stark?

Sounds like somebody hasn't read any of JMS' Spider-Man's run.

[Kevinroc]

Sounds like somebody hasn't read any of JMS' Spider-Man's run.

I did read JMS' run. MCU Peter never called Tony out for his crap.

[Lee]

I don't know if that's fair. I'd say she's about on par with Flash as far as being comic accurate (which isn't saying much).

MCU Flash Thompson was still a popular kid who bullied Peter Parker but was a big fan of Spider-Man. The change from meathead jock to smart kid was a big one, but they kept the other defining elements.

The creators knew what they were doing with her nickname even if they handled it very clunky.

I think they just wanted to write their own character but use a familiar (nick)name. They clearly didn't care to write anything resembling the comic book character.