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

[TinkerSpider]

The audience votes with their wallets. Amazing Spider-Man continues to sell. They did a married Spider-Man comic, but not enough people bought it.

Unmarrying Spider-Man stuck and they're never going to undo it. If a Marvel Comics EIC wanted to re-marry Spider-Man then they'd have to justify it to the higher-ups at Disney. Disney isn't going to be on board with that because Spider-Man is one of their most popular kid brands.

It doesn't matter how many cheers someone gets at a convention, it's not going to change what Disney wants from the brand.

First, Amazing Spider-Man had its highest sustained monthly sales era and its highest single selling issue - Todd McFarlane’s Spider-Man #1 - in the period when Peter and MJ were married. Secret Wars Renew Your Vows, when it filled the ASM slot during the event, was one of the best selling titles of Secret Wars which is why it eventually got a spin-off. But AU and side titles never sell as well as ASM regardless of Peter’s marital status.

Second, that’s not how Disney works. Bob Chapek could not care less what happens in a comic book. A comic book sells, what, 100,000 copies a month if it sells well? Maybe the trade collection sells another 100,000 copies, which would be very good sales.

That’s far from enough consumers to get Bob Chapek to raise an eyelid. Do you know how many people saw No Way Home in just its opening weekend?

Twenty million people. In one weekend. During a pandemic. That’s not counting people who saw it in the subsequent weeks or in streaming.

200,000 comic book readers is 0.001% of the opening weekend audience for the film. That’s the audience Disney cares about. They care about the Tom Holland MCU Spider-Man, who also appears in their theme parks.

The comics are just cheap intellectual property - because Disney already owns them - for Disney to exploit in their key business of films, television and theme parks.

If Disney didn’t have a problem with Spider-Man being graphically beaten with blood splatters everywhere and Tombstone being a mass murderer with dead bodies shot execution style, blood leaking from their wounds in a “kids” book, then they are fine with him being in a loving, committed relationship

I find the relatable comment funny because no matter how you slice it, Marvel is insulting Spider-Man readers. Either we are so hopelessly socially inept and such incredible losers at life that we can only relate to another jobless, penniless loser who can’t keep a relationship, or we are so emotionally dead that we are unable to relate to wanting to find a life partner with whom to share our lives. Either way, I feel like I should take offense, but the comment is so absurd I can only laugh.

[Huntsman Spider]

First, Amazing Spider-Man had its highest sustained monthly sales era and its highest single selling issue - Todd McFarlane’s Spider-Man #1 - in the period when Peter and MJ were married. Secret Wars Renew Your Vows, when it filled the ASM slot during the event, was one of the best selling titles of Secret Wars which is why it eventually got a spin-off. But AU and side titles never sell as well as ASM regardless of Peter’s marital status.

Second, that’s not how Disney works. Bob Chapek could not care less what happens in a comic book. A comic book sells, what, 100,000 copies a month if it sells well? Maybe the trade collection sells another 100,000 copies, which would be very good sales.

That’s far from enough consumers to get Bob Chapek to raise an eyelid. Do you know how many people saw No Way Home in just its opening weekend?

Twenty million people. In one weekend. During a pandemic. That’s not counting people who saw it in the subsequent weeks or in streaming.

200,000 comic book readers is 0.001% of the opening weekend audience for the film. That’s the audience Disney cares about. They care about the Tom Holland MCU Spider-Man, who also appears in their theme parks.

The comics are just cheap intellectual property - because Disney already owns them - for Disney to exploit in their key business of films, television and theme parks.

If Disney didn’t have a problem with Spider-Man being graphically beaten with blood splatters everywhere and Tombstone being a mass murderer with dead bodies shot execution style, blood leaking from their wounds in a “kids” book, then they are fine with him being in a loving, committed relationship

I find the relatable comment funny because no matter how you slice it, Marvel is insulting Spider-Man readers. Either we are so hopelessly socially inept and such incredible losers at life that we can only relate to another jobless, penniless loser who can’t keep a relationship, or we are so emotionally dead that we are unable to relate to wanting to find a life partner with whom to share our lives. Either way, I feel like I should take offense, but the comment is so absurd I can only laugh.

Laughter is good. It quashes the urge to do horrible things that will be inevitably regretted once the high of sheer rage comes down.

[Lee]

Spider-Man is one of Disney's most valuable IPs. It's the most profitable American super-hero IP. The comics are the well that all other Marvel media draws from.

The Marvel Comics EIC has bosses to answer to. They cannot make big permanent changes to their most valuable and most scrutinised IP without getting approval. If they wanted to permanently change the red parts of Spider-Man's costume to green, that would need to get approval. If they wanted Peter Parker to permanently change his name to John Smith, that would need to get approval.

It's not going to happen. They're not going to revert Spider-Man back to being a married man, just like they're not going to revert Carol Danvers back to being Ms. Marvel. It's just not not what the brand is anymore.

[Lukmendes]

I remember when Cebulski did Loners. He felt like a fresh voice back then. Now? Well after the whole damn Akira debacle and his uninspired run as EiC I struggle to reconcile the two.

It could be a case of him becoming worse with time, or having the right editor who smacked him on the back of his head and told him "no" when something weird came up.

Funny that what started Cebulski's nonsense was "Fresh Start", now it's just "back to mediocrity", specially with ASM.

Ew gross. Besides, if you wanted him to be relatable to comic fans, he should have no life at all

He practically doesn't have one anymore since being Spidey has taken over his life so much lol.

I find the relatable comment funny because no matter how you slice it, Marvel is insulting Spider-Man readers. Either we are so hopelessly socially inept and such incredible losers at life that we can only relate to another jobless, penniless loser who can’t keep a relationship, or we are so emotionally dead that we are unable to relate to wanting to find a life partner with whom to share our lives. Either way, I feel like I should take offense, but the comment is so absurd I can only laugh.

The "relatable" comment is always just an excuse for Marvel's own prefered of writing style anyways.

Which hey, if that's what they prefer, that's be fair enough, even if I don't like how they use Spidey, but they try to pretend there's a bigger reasoning to do all of this, when there really isn't lol.

[Kevinroc]

Spider-Man is one of Disney's most valuable IPs. It's the most profitable American super-hero IP. The comics are the well that all other Marvel media draws from.

The Marvel Comics EIC has bosses to answer to. They cannot make big permanent changes to their most valuable and most scrutinised IP without getting approval. If they wanted to permanently change the red parts of Spider-Man's costume to green, that would need to get approval. If they wanted Peter Parker to permanently change his name to John Smith, that would need to get approval.

It's not going to happen. They're not going to revert Spider-Man back to being a married man, just like they're not going to revert Carol Danvers back to being Ms. Marvel. It's just not not what the brand is anymore.

I ask again. Do you know the inner workings of Marvel and Disney? Do you know who fans need to speak to on the subject?

[TinkerSpider]

Spider-Man is one of Disney's most valuable IPs. It's the most profitable American super-hero IP. The comics are the well that all other Marvel media draws from.

The Marvel Comics EIC has bosses to answer to. They cannot make big permanent changes to their most valuable and most scrutinised IP without getting approval. If they wanted to permanently change the red parts of Spider-Man's costume to green, that would need to get approval. If they wanted Peter Parker to permanently change his name to John Smith, that would need to get approval.

It's not going to happen. They're not going to revert Spider-Man back to being a married man, just like they're not going to revert Carol Danvers back to being Ms. Marvel. It's just not not what the brand is anymore.

Yes, CB Cebulski can.

Cebulski might have to check with Kevin Feige, who is his boss as the Marvel CCO (chief creative officer) and who has oversight of Marvel Comics editorial creative. Cebulski would probably check with Feige anyway as a common professional courtesy, but I highly doubt Feige is making granular decisions about monthly comics.

I can assure you Alan Bergman, who is Feige’s boss, and Bob Chapek, who is Bergman’s boss, do not materially care what happens in a monthly comic book that sells, let’s be generous, 500,000 copies across monthly and trade readers. Let’s then say 4 people read each of those 500,000 issues, bring the number of eyeballs to 2 million.

That is still a drop in the vast bucket of how many people will see the MCU Spider-Man film or the animated series or visit the theme parks and ride the Web Slingers ride. (In fact, the Spider-Man ride at Universal Studios Islands of Adventure has Easter eggs in Peter’s Daily Bugle office that refer to Mary Jane Watson-Parker still. More people have been on that ride than have ever picked up a Spider-Man comic).

Disney was fine - or more to the point, simply did not care - when a supervillain took over as Spider-Man for an extended time. They would not care if Spider-Man was in loving, committed relationship. What matters to Disney are their film and TV versions, because those versions are seen by exponentially more people to the nth degree. The MCU is Disney’s main brand, the comics are just ancillary extra intellectual property whose stories they might adapt/might not adapt.

Regardless, there is no faceless cabal at Disney that would block Cebukski. The chain of command is Cebulski —> Feige —> Bergman —> Chapek.

[WebLurker]

I have been saying here for several years, the marriage will be restored in ASM 1000, and I still have that opinion.

Doesn't the affirmation that Marvel doesn't care about the marriage and is having nothing to do with it put a bit of a crimp in that prediction?

[Kurolegacy]

It honestly amazes me how they stick to this “Peter must be relatable” thing as an excuse for why he can’t be married, stable or have a family as if these aren’t some of the most relatable things in life that the majority of people strive for. Can’t have any of that yet he can be a genius who could form a harem with the number of super model looking women he’s dated and somehow affords to live in New York while perpetually being broke. Now that’s totally relatable.

[Lunala]

This news is bad for my blood pressure—Will MJ just continue to drift in and out of relationships like she has been for the rest of her life? It's so unfair and I want to scream. Why, oh why, do they seem to think this is a good idea? EXCUSE ME? Marvel? Why are you deliberately tone deaf?

[Celgress]

TinkerSpider is right. Comic book sales are a drop in the bucket so let's all stop buying new Spidey comic books for a month or two and encourage others to do the same. It is not like Disney or Marvel will care anyway, right? Let's see if the theory is true that they don't care. There are more than enough classic issues and trades to purchase anyhow.

Edit - I'm serious BTW. I'm tired of being disrespected as "just a comic book fan" by Marvel Editorial, Disney, whoever. I see no point propping up an industry that does not respect its fans and takes us for granted.

[Kanos]

Doesn't the affirmation that Marvel doesn't care about the marriage and is having nothing to do with it put a bit of a crimp in that prediction?

Maybe they just didn't want to spoil it. It would be weird to confirm at a fanmeet that marriage is coming back because it would ruin how Wells stupid mystery box ends. I'm not saying the marriage will return, but it makes sense to keep it a secret.

[Matt Rat]

Maybe they just didn't want to spoil it. It would be weird to confirm at a fanmeet that marriage is coming back because it would ruin how Wells stupid mystery box ends. I'm not saying the marriage will return, but it makes sense to keep it a secret.

Yeah, Marvel were denying Colossus was coming back at panels mere weeks before Whedon brought him back.

There's an awful lot of mixed signals. Cebulski could have talked a bit about "Lost Hunt" to appease the crowd, seeing as that features both the marriage and a pregnant MJ. Why publish a series where Peter is a functioning adult when the narrative they're pushing presently is that he can't be one?

[WebLurker]

Maybe they just didn't want to spoil it. It would be weird to confirm at a fanmeet that marriage is coming back because it would ruin how Wells stupid mystery box ends. I'm not saying the marriage will return, but it makes sense to keep it a secret.

Somehow, that sounds too good to be true.

[Matt Rat]

It's not going to happen. They're not going to revert Spider-Man back to being a married man

They will in November.

[Lukmendes]

It honestly amazes me how they stick to this “Peter must be relatable” thing as an excuse for why he can’t be married, stable or have a family as if these aren’t some of the most relatable things in life that the majority of people strive for. Can’t have any of that yet he can be a genius who could form a harem with the number of super model looking women he’s dated and somehow affords to live in New York while perpetually being broke. Now that’s totally relatable.

Yeah, it's clear "Spider-Man has to be relatable" is just a bad excuse they parrot to explain why he's still sucking, but actually paying attention to the comics shows how unrelatable Spidey is.

It's even funnier for me, I never saw Spidey as that much of an everyman, so them trying to pretend he is one while doing everything they can to not make him into one, yeah...

TinkerSpider is right. Comic book sales are a drop in the bucket so let's all stop buying new Spidey comic books for a month or two and encourage others to do the same. It is not like Disney or Marvel will care anyway, right? Let's see if the theory is true that they don't care. There are more than enough classic issues and trades to purchase anyhow.

Edit - I'm serious BTW. I'm tired of being disrespected as "just a comic book fan" by Marvel Editorial, Disney, whoever. I see no point propping up an industry that does not respect its fans and takes us for granted.

Eh problem is that people keep buying stuff out of habit, no matter how bad it gets they'll keep buying.

I've done my part for a bit and told people to stop buying ASM after #1 vol 6 came out, I doubt anyone listened, and I doubt if a campaign was made most who buy would still do so.

Maybe they just didn't want to spoil it. It would be weird to confirm at a fanmeet that marriage is coming back because it would ruin how Wells stupid mystery box ends. I'm not saying the marriage will return, but it makes sense to keep it a secret.

Yeah, Marvel lying over these things is not impossible, but with the way they ended Spencer's run, the way Wells is writing ASM, I doubt they're lying here.

And honestly? Even if they are lying and marriage is returning, or at the very least, Spidey and MJ are getting back together, Wells is ones of the last writers who I'd want to write those two together.