Amazing Spider-Man #10 Preview

[Huntsman Spider]

Well those in power actually had the chance to bring her back and they all said no. Plus there's no reason to bring her back because of a character that brings in moire money has replaced her

So, it's just sour grapes, then. They can't bring back the 616 Gwen Stacy because of breaking internal narrative consistency or something like that, but they can sure vent their frustration at that by sabotaging Mary Jane Watson as a character and her relationship with/marriage to Peter. Makes sense.

[Mercwmouth12]

So, it's just sour grapes, then. They can't bring back the 616 Gwen Stacy because of breaking internal narrative consistency or something like that, but they can sure vent their frustration at that by sabotaging Mary Jane Watson as a character and her relationship with/marriage to Peter. Makes sense.

It's more they're doing a continuous drama for the characters as it's an ongoing story and you'll get many different stories. Many not good like the current run or good ones down the line. This run seems to be a bust and marvel has already put it out there with how dark web is being presented that they're cashing out to give the torch to someone else

[NC_Yankee]

It's more they're doing a continuous drama for the characters as it's an ongoing story and you'll get many different stories. Many not good like the current run or good ones down the line. This run seems to be a bust and marvel has already put it out there with how dark web is being presented that they're cashing out to give the torch to someone else

I just hope however it ends we are not stuck with a Stacy Twins WTF type ending that disappointed everyone concerned.

[TinkerSpider]

"I have two kids who don't even know my name" - um, okay dude.

Hey, maybe we found the father of MJ's kids, one of whom still doesn't a name!

Don't we already know how Peter gets judged?

We know how Miles was judged, but not Peter. Of course, once again ASM is behind what has already happened in other books.

[Huntsman Spider]

It's more they're doing a continuous drama for the characters as it's an ongoing story and you'll get many different stories. Many not good like the current run or good ones down the line. This run seems to be a bust and marvel has already put it out there with how dark web is being presented that they're cashing out to give the torch to someone else

It's the new Mackie/Byrne, from what I can tell.

[Kevinroc]

Pretty much. The problem is that Marvel is currently and has been run by people, judging by their output in regard to Spider-Man, who are still sore over Gwen Stacy being dead instead of married to Peter and even sorer over Mary Jane Watson having been the one who got to marry Peter. That's all it is, really, a bunch of frustrated and disappointed shippers, but they've got actual power (or influence) over how the stories and characters unfold and develop, so they're venting that frustration and disappointment at not being able to get Gwen back.

That's not what it's about. It's the idea that Gwen represents lost love. The problem is Marvel has a highly marketable superhero named Gwen Stacy, so it's trying to have it both ways, but the old way isn't one that anyone actually cares about anymore.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

Pretty much. The problem is that Marvel is currently and has been run by people, judging by their output in regard to Spider-Man, who are still sore over Gwen Stacy being dead instead of married to Peter and even sorer over Mary Jane Watson having been the one who got to marry Peter. That's all it is, really, a bunch of frustrated and disappointed shippers, but they've got actual power (or influence) over how the stories and characters unfold and develop, so they're venting that frustration and disappointment at not being able to get Gwen back.

I don't think it's about that. I think Marvel is obsessed with recreating 1962 when Peter was groundbreaking for being an independent teenage hero, thinking this is going to bring them lots of new young readers but not realizing that so much has changed since. (Like the fact that your average new reader isn't a kid anymore or that kids are first exposed to Spider-Man outside the comics and then go on to read 616 only later).

Even the "relatable" thing goes back to that. What Lowe really means is "We want him to be relatable to teens", who are unmarried and typically more broke than adults.

[spiderlink]

That's not what it's about. It's the idea that Gwen represents lost love. The problem is Marvel has a highly marketable superhero named Gwen Stacy, so it's trying to have it both ways, but the old way isn't one that anyone actually cares about anymore.

Tbh i don’t think people who read comics care about spider gwen hahaha

[Kevinroc]

Tbh i don’t think people who read comics care about spider gwen hahaha

More people care about her than Spider-Man's dead girlfriend.

[Huntsman Spider]

That's not what it's about. It's the idea that Gwen represents lost love. The problem is Marvel has a highly marketable superhero named Gwen Stacy, so it's trying to have it both ways, but the old way isn't one that anyone actually cares about anymore.

I don't think it's about that. I think Marvel is obsessed with recreating 1962 when Peter was groundbreaking for being an independent teenage hero, thinking this is going to bring them lots of new young readers but not realizing that so much has changed since. (Like the fact that your average new reader isn't a kid anymore or that kids are first exposed to Spider-Man outside the comics and then go on to read 616 only later).

Even the "relatable" thing goes back to that. What Lowe really means is "We want him to be relatable to teens", who are unmarried and typically more broke than adults.

Fair points you both raise, though that still goes to a point about Marvel execs/editorial being stuck in the past and stubbornly refusing to acknowledge any sort of change or growth that would force them to change their approach or strategy as well, even if it's not as petty as being disappointed shippers.

[Kevinroc]

Fair points you both raise, though that still goes to a point about Marvel execs/editorial being stuck in the past and stubbornly refusing to acknowledge any sort of change or growth that would force them to change their approach or strategy as well, even if it's not as petty as being disappointed shippers.

The problem is that editorial's views on the subject is that kind of thought process are what led to the status quo of the current run, which it's clear a lot of people have very strong feelings about.

[Huntsman Spider]

The problem is that editorial's views on the subject is that kind of thought process are what led to the status quo of the current run, which it's clear a lot of people have very strong feelings about.

Exactly . . .

[Kaitou D. Kid]

More people care about her than Spider-Man's dead girlfriend.

My general-audience friends who don't read comics know her as "the bitch who dies".

[Kevinroc]

My general-audience friends who don't read comics know her as "the bitch who dies".

Other than the inappropriateness of referring to her as a "bitch", they just put Spider-Gwen into Fortnite, so it isn't like she's some complete unknown. (And that's kind of my point. They have a highly marketable superhero named Gwen Stacy these days. You will never see the doomed civilian love interest in an adaptation again.)

[HypnoHustler]

Another crossover event. Yawn. Judgement Day, Dark Web, Dingo's Breakfast, whatever. Wake me up when all this nonsense is over. Are we ever going to get back to plain old superheroics? I'd love a few one-off issues, where Spidey humorously chases Slyde, or uncovers Electro's plan to feed off the city's grid, or whatever. Instead we get Spidey talking to Tony Stark about some Celestial crap I couldn't care less about, and Gwen appearing in her death outfit (seriously is that her only wardrobe choice?) with a red glowing eye. Is this supposed to get me hyped?