How much of an adaptation of OMD is No Way Home?

[Daibhidh]

I can't believe it didn't occur to anyone working on the script for No Way Home that it might remind people of OMD/OMIT.

But I don't think that's to OMD/OMIT's credit. Webb's Spider-man series arguably failed because it tried to adapt stories that worked perfectly well in the comics but which relied on the comics continuity for their effect. To the extent that No Way Home works it's because it's taken a story that is a sow's ear because aggressively working against comics continuity and tried to make a purse out of it.
Captain America: Civil War makes the comics Civil War look worse since it's made it clear that the flaws weren't things you just had to accept for the sake of the story.

[Agent Z]

The idea of retconning continuity and splitting Peter from MJ comes from OMD. That's about it.

If anything, NWH is kinda the anti-OMD. They took a Spidey that was more like the Post-OMD Spidey (CEO/tech based, incompetent, stereotypically youthful) and made him more like the pre-OMD Stan Lee Spidey.

So let's break these down:

1) Peter is a teenager in these films. He has more of a reason to be somewhat immature than comic Peter who hasn't been a teenager in decades. And he's nowhere near as pathetic as Peter has been post-OMD or even pre-OMD.

2) Peter created his own web-shooters before he even met Tony. He also defeated Vulture without the suit Tony gave him.

3) I have no idea how anyone can call this version of Peter incompetent given he's accomplished more impressive feats than his comic counterpart did when he was a teenager. And no, occasionally asking for help does not make him incompetent, otherwise Captain America would be the most incompetent hero in the MCU.

As much as some MCU fans don't want to admit it, that's a huge factor in why NWH was accepted and OMD wasn't. A lot of fans thought there was something "off" with the MCU version and wanted a lot of stuff (mostly the Iron Man Jr stuff) retconned. Whereas outside Editorial and some fringe fringe fans, no one thought there was anything "off" with the married Spider-Man. Almost no one asked for it. But they did ask for MCU Spidey to be "fixed" in some way.

The people who were asking for an MCU Spider-Man to be "fixed" are as much fringe as those who hated the marriage. It was mostly comic fans.

Splitting MCU Peter from MJ was never going to have the same reaction because the context is different. MCU Peter and MJ are still in high school, so it's fine if you do will-they-won't-they crap for a while. Plus, it's obvious they're going to be reunited. The MCU is too trope-savvy to make the same mistake as Quesada. That and Zendaya is an A-list star. The idea NWH was some permanent sendoff is just laughable.

No Way Home is built on the same premise as One More Day: the idea that a "true" Spider-Man has to suffer. It was executed more competently which is why it was less enraging, but it is not really an anti-OMD. spoilers:

Across the Spider-Verse is more an anti-OMD and it's approach to Spider-Man arguably has more in common with the first two MCU Spider-Man films than it does with No Way Home.

end of spoilers

[exile001]

It's an adaptation is as much as any of MCU Spider-Man is an adaptation. It took a very general idea, in this case wiping his identity (a super hero trope), and did something entirely different with it.

If anything, it's more an adaptation of the post-Civil War era as his identity is only wiped properly at the very end and most of the film.

I wonder if the writers even know about OMD, let alone OMIT, outside of a vague notion of the identity wipe. Maybe they read it once. Maybe someone at Marvel suggested it. Maybe they came up with it on their own.

Regardless, I highly doubt it even entered their minds to do anything but make an entertaining Spider-Man movie as opposed to making some statement/reflection on OMD.

Unless...

fb1.jpg

[Spider-Tiger]

No Way Home is built on the same premise as One More Day: the idea that a "true" Spider-Man has to suffer. It was executed more competently which is why it was less enraging, but it is not really an anti-OMD. spoilers:

Across the Spider-Verse is more an anti-OMD and it's approach to Spider-Man arguably has more in common with the first two MCU Spider-Man films than it does with No Way Home.

end of spoilers

I disagree with this take. OMD is built on the premise that Spider-Man must never grow up. That too much change to the status quo is a bad thing. No more, no less.

NWH is not saying Spider-Man must always suffer. It's saying that being Spider-Man carries certain consequences. OMD isn't even saying that Spider-Man must always suffer since it, more or less, ends on a happy note for the character in a quasi-Lee/Romita setup. (Unless you extrapolate BND era writers arguing that Peter Parker must be a "loser" but that has more to do with a perceived incompetence than it does suffering)

Klling Aunt May to propel the character's growth and transition into adulthood was very much an anti-OMD move even if it wasn't as explicit as ATSV. It eviscerates a "true" status quo that OMD is all about maintaining for the character: a forever adolescence. (That's likely the reason comic writers argued against doing that in the PS4 game.)

[Xenon]

I can't believe it didn't occur to anyone working on the script for No Way Home that it might remind people of OMD/OMIT.

But I don't think that's to OMD/OMIT's credit. Webb's Spider-man series arguably failed because it tried to adapt stories that worked perfectly well in the comics but which relied on the comics continuity for their effect. To the extent that No Way Home works it's because it's taken a story that is a sow's ear because aggressively working against comics continuity and tried to make a purse out of it.
Captain America: Civil War makes the comics Civil War look worse since it's made it clear that the flaws weren't things you just had to accept for the sake of the story.

Right this is what I mean. They clearly took the premise of STrange casting a spell to erase everyone's memories straight from OMIT. But then they made it good instead of one of the worst things ever.

[bat39]

Well...it certainly is a kind of adaptation of OMD, or rather OMIT. Dr. Strange casting a spell to wipe out the knowledge of Spider-Man's identity is 100% from OMIT, and the general idea of Peter and MJ being split up, and Spider-Man's status quo changing, is very much in line with OMD, at least on a superficial level.

That said, like a lot of comic-book films, it's not a 'straight' adaptation of the source material. It borrows some ideas from the comics, but then put's its own original spin on them to tell a compelling story which makes sense in the context of the MCU Spider-Man. Kinda like how Iron Man 2 borrowed some elements from stories like 'Demon in a Bottle' and 'Armor Wars' to tell an otherwise largely original story for RDJ's Tony Stark. Or how, on the DC/WB side, Matt Reeves borrowed elements from 'The Long Halloween' to tell a new 'Year Two' Batman story. Or how Logan takes some basic ideas from 'Old Man Logan' to provide Hugh Jackman's Wolverine with an ending.

It's an adaptation of OMIT, not OMD.

OMD DID a lot of things, but OMD is fundamentally about Peter's life and marriage to Mary Jane. The deal is about their marriage, the lead up is about what his life could have been like without Mary Jane, guided by a kid he would have had had he stayed with Mary Jane. Ultimately for a story to be an adaptation of OMD, you need a married Spider-Man choosing to sacrifice his marriage for dubious reasons.

OMIT is a worse story in that it's a lot messier. It's about new continuity (how didn't they get married) and setting up the status quo he was in at the start of BND. Like a recent explainer tale, it's one of the worst things ever printed. But there's basically two events in OMIT. The first is the retelling of the wedding and how it was averted. The second is the tale of him restoring his secret identity and how that led to the end of his relationship with Mary Jane. That second event is very clearly what No Way Home is based off of. Peter has his secret identity revealed to everyone, he needs it back in the bottle, he goes to Dr. Strange to do it, , he changes the deal at the last second, consequences ensure. The consequences are different, of course (total multiversal breakdown vs. MJ mad at him for dumb reasons), but that's clearly what they're referencing.

Saying it's an adaptation of OMD is off though. Close as OMIT is dependent on OMD to exist, but OMIT is its own bag of terrible.

Agreed.

I agree that it's more OMIT than OMD. Peter makes no deals to save May here. He uses Dr. Strange's help to undo the outing of his identity. That's all from OMIT.

People detest OMD to the extent that they do because it is a story about Spider-man sacrificing his marriage (and child?) to the devil to save May. None of that story is in No Way Home.

The film is part Back in Black, part OMIT, part Spider-verse, and part The Night Gwen Stacy Died.

Yeah, The Night Gwen Stacy died is very much part of the DNA of NWH as well. The presence of Andrew Garfield's Spider-Man, who participated in a literal adaptation of that story, just reinforces it. But it also kinda subverts that story, by having Garfield's Peter save MJ, and then by having Holland's Peter rehabilitate Osborn instead of (inadvertently) causing his death.

I guess that's the beauty of the film, one I never appreciated until now. On one level, it repackages and retells classic Spider-Man stories (going right back to Uncle Ben's death being remixed as Aunt May's death). But instead of just playing around with familiar story-beats, it does something new with them as well...new for the films anyway.

The idea of retconning continuity and splitting Peter from MJ comes from OMD. That's about it.

If anything, NWH is kinda the anti-OMD. They took a Spidey that was more like the Post-OMD Spidey (CEO/tech based, incompetent, stereotypically youthful) and made him more like the pre-OMD Stan Lee Spidey.

As much as some MCU fans don't want to admit it, that's a huge factor in why NWH was accepted and OMD wasn't. A lot of fans thought there was something "off" with the MCU version and wanted a lot of stuff (mostly the Iron Man Jr stuff) retconned. Whereas outside Editorial and some fringe fringe fans, no one thought there was anything "off" with the married Spider-Man. Almost no one asked for it. But they did ask for MCU Spidey to be "fixed" in some way.

Splitting MCU Peter from MJ was never going to have the same reaction because the context is different. MCU Peter and MJ are still in high school, so it's fine if you do will-they-won't-they crap for a while. Plus, it's obvious they're going to be reunited. The MCU is too trope-savvy to make the same mistake as Quesada. That and Zendaya is an A-list star. The idea NWH was some permanent sendoff is just laughable.

I guess the only other thing they have in common is they both gave Peter's secret identity back. So I guess you can say the main thing they looked at OMD as a tool for how to retcon stuff. That's about the only value it had for them.

Yeah, you're right about the contrast between the two stories. Or rather, they are similar, but the implications are different. Both stories end with taking Spider-Man "back to basics" in some sense. But in the case of OMD, Peter being restored to his Lee/Romita-esq bachelor life is a sort of 'regression' for the character, wiping away decades of development. While in the case of NWH, giving him a more classic status quo is arguably a 'progression' for this specific iteration of Spider-Man, who has to completely fend for himself, both as Peter and as Spidey, for the first time.

I can't believe it didn't occur to anyone working on the script for No Way Home that it might remind people of OMD/OMIT.

But I don't think that's to OMD/OMIT's credit. Webb's Spider-man series arguably failed because it tried to adapt stories that worked perfectly well in the comics but which relied on the comics continuity for their effect. To the extent that No Way Home works it's because it's taken a story that is a sow's ear because aggressively working against comics continuity and tried to make a purse out of it.
Captain America: Civil War makes the comics Civil War look worse since it's made it clear that the flaws weren't things you just had to accept for the sake of the story.

I think Gwen's death was definitely earned in the Webb Spider-Man movies, given how the Peter-Gwen relationship was well-developed in them (sometimes even better than Peter-MJ in the Raimi movies). TASM2 is just a mess of a film for a whole host of other reasons, but adapting The Night Gwen Stacy Died is not one of them.

[godisawesome]

But MJ came back in the comics.

Well, yes in that a writer eventually reunited them as an unmarried couple for a brief, period, but no as in her “status as the one” was still vehemently rejected both by editorial during that story, and then even more emphatically afterwards through hackneyed retreading of magical bullshit and bad character writing.

It’s sort of like how, by the same comparative token, MCU Peter and MJ still being teenagers developing a relationship isn’t comparable to Comics Peter and MJ being a 30-something married couple in terms of when the “magic” happens.

It’s again why I personally think that the “OMD DNA” in NWH is heavily dependent on whether or not MJ comes back into the story at all or not - because if she doesn’t, than I think the only real part of OMD that matters to NWH (Peter not having a “the one”) is kept and remains integrated, but if she comes back at all, than it becomes a firm rejection of OMD’s only substantial contribution to the story, because there’s no way she comes back into the story and *isn’t* still “the one” for Peter in the MCU.

It’s not MJ’s physical presence or even a temporary acknowledgement as the current love interest that OMD is against - it’s the concept of Peter having a permanent monogamous relationship at all.

I disagree with this take. OMD is built on the premise that Spider-Man must never grow up. That too much change to the status quo is a bad thing. No more, no less.

NWH is not saying Spider-Man must always suffer. It's saying that being Spider-Man carries certain consequences. OMD isn't even saying that Spider-Man must always suffer since it, more or less, ends on a happy note for the character in a quasi-Lee/Romita setup. (Unless you extrapolate BND era writers arguing that Peter Parker must be a "loser" but that has more to do with a perceived incompetence than it does suffering)

Klling Aunt May to propel the character's growth and transition into adulthood was very much an anti-OMD move even if it wasn't as explicit as ATSV. It eviscerates a "true" status quo that OMD is all about maintaining for the character: a forever adolescence. (That's likely the reason comic writers argued against doing that in the PS4 game.)

Yeah, you're right about the contrast between the two stories. Or rather, they are similar, but the implications are different. Both stories end with taking Spider-Man "back to basics" in some sense. But in the case of OMD, Peter being restored to his Lee/Romita-esq bachelor life is a sort of 'regression' for the character, wiping away decades of development. While in the case of NWH, giving him a more classic status quo is arguably a 'progression' for this specific iteration of Spider-Man, who has to completely fend for himself, both as Peter and as Spidey, for the first time.

I think you guys have pinpointed how much OMD is defined by it’s confrontational meta-text as a story as much as it is by the editorial mandate it seeks to cement in place, and how much the meta-text doesn’t match up to NWH’s meta-text anymore than it’s plot does.

In the same way “Save my aunt who’s okay with dying by making a deal with the devil for my marriage and unborn child only” isn’t at all comparable to “Save the multiverse from utter destruction by making everyone who knows and love some forget who I am” in an actual comparison, the meta-text of “Spider-Man, rather than continue the progression that defined his franchise for decades, must from here on out have an eternal status quo as a 30-something swinging single and sad sack created as an almost mocking mash-up of stuff Lee and Romita did with a lot of stuff they didn’t do” isn’t really comparable to “Young MCU Spider-Man must grow in a crucible comparable to the Lee and Romita days, but will still grow in it.”

And yeah, Aunt May’s death is a major dividing line again between the two in philosophy; OMD follows from the same kind of warped nostalgia and shallow marketing-first POV that has now resurrected May multiple times seemingly just to serve the same function as before, while NWH and the PS4 game are both so invested in growing the character they’ve killed her off far earlier than the comics eventually got around to for a while.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

So let's break these down:

1) Peter is a teenager in these films. He has more of a reason to be somewhat immature than comic Peter who hasn't been a teenager in decades. And he's nowhere near as pathetic as Peter has been post-OMD or even pre-OMD.

But he is naive and immature compared to Lee/Ditko Peter, Ultimate Peter, Spectacular Peter, and pretty much every other teen Peter. That is because he is an adult's ignorant idea of a teenager.

2) Peter created his own web-shooters before he even met Tony. He also defeated Vulture without the suit Tony gave him.

Cool, but that alone doesn't change anything when we look at the bigger picture.

3) I have no idea how anyone can call this version of Peter incompetent given he's accomplished more impressive feats than his comic counterpart did when he was a teenager. And no, occasionally asking for help does not make him incompetent, otherwise Captain America would be the most incompetent hero in the MCU.

What? Dude, the 616 version was sparring with a villain every week. Not to mention the adventures he had in crossover books. Not to mention that the 616 villains are typically deadlier than anywhere else (at least Green Goblin and Doc Ock are).

There is literally almost no other Spider-Man we can think of that had that level of experience by age 19. Not Tobey's Spider-Man. Not Andrew's. Not even TAS or Insomniac Spidey. The only Peter that maybe match Stan Lee's Peter by 18-19 are Ultimate Peter (doubt it since he was physically weaker), Spectacular Peter, and the two main Peters from the Spider-Verse films. The idea that Tom of all versions is the most experienced or accomplished is ludicrous.

The people who were asking for an MCU Spider-Man to be "fixed" are as much fringe as those who hated the marriage. It was mostly comic fans.

Google "Spider-Man Iron Man problem" and you'll find endless articles on it. Google articles defending OMD and you'll be lucky to find a handful. Same is true of social media in general.

No Way Home is built on the same premise as One More Day: the idea that a "true" Spider-Man has to suffer. It was executed more competently which is why it was less enraging, but it is not really an anti-OMD.

Spider-Tiger beat me to it, but that's not at all the premise of OMD.

Also, fans felt that MCU Peter felt like a trust-fund kid and wanted him brought down a notch. It's part of why that miserable ending works. It will never work as well anywhere else because most fans don't wish that on any other version of Peter. The only other Peter fans maybe want to see go through that is the Armored Peter from TAS.

spoilers:

Across the Spider-Verse is more an anti-OMD and it's approach to Spider-Man arguably has more in common with the first two MCU Spider-Man films than it does with No Way Home.

end of spoilers

I don't think it has more in common with the first two MCU films.

Yeah, you're right about the contrast between the two stories. Or rather, they are similar, but the implications are different. Both stories end with taking Spider-Man "back to basics" in some sense. But in the case of OMD, Peter being restored to his Lee/Romita-esq bachelor life is a sort of 'regression' for the character, wiping away decades of development. While in the case of NWH, giving him a more classic status quo is arguably a 'progression' for this specific iteration of Spider-Man, who has to completely fend for himself, both as Peter and as Spidey, for the first time.

Based. You put it way better than me.

[godisawesome]

Eh, I don’t think MCU Peter’s Stark connections were hated as much as they irritated critics while still working well to appeal to fans of that particular adaptation - and that No Way Home crafting a plot that satisfied *both* types is another sign of it being radically different from something like OMD.

The MCU Spider-Man also had them alleviate some of the concerns by emphasizing victories he won without Tony, even as Far From Home clearly tried to position him as Stark’s successor as a “star” of the phase, which is why I don’t think that the Stark stuff ever drove people away, even if it irritated them; it seems to have an inelastic impact on the demand for Spider-Man movies, at least in comparison to problems the franchise has had in films before.

But back to the comparison for the thread…

NWH clearly has an empathy for the fans who dislike the Stark connection *and* the fans who like it as well - and not just an emotional empathy, but an actual intellectual understanding that allowed them to transition the character away without throwing in an obnoxious meta-textual argument about how MCU Peter was “messed up” by the Stark connection.

The meta text is still *there* mind you, but it connects to stuff from the previous movies and acknowledges why MCU fans liked that Spider-Man, and isn’t obnoxious but fairly sophisticated and understanding.

…And doesn’t have a specific bone to pick with MJ, instead contextualizing her losing her knowledge as a possible cliffhanger, unlike OMD making it clear editorial wouldn’t let any marriage happen ever again.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

Eh, I don’t think MCU Peter’s Stark connections were hated as much as they irritated critics while still working well to appeal to fans of that particular adaptation - and that No Way Home crafting a plot that satisfied *both* types is another sign of it being radically different from something like OMD.

The MCU Spider-Man also had them alleviate some of the concerns by emphasizing victories he won without Tony, even as Far From Home clearly tried to position him as Stark’s successor as a “star” of the phase, which is why I don’t think that the Stark stuff ever drove people away, even if it irritated them; it seems to have an inelastic impact on the demand for Spider-Man movies, at least in comparison to problems the franchise has had in films before.

But back to the comparison for the thread…

NWH clearly has an empathy for the fans who dislike the Stark connection *and* the fans who like it as well - and not just an emotional empathy, but an actual intellectual understanding that allowed them to transition the character away without throwing in an obnoxious meta-textual argument about how MCU Peter was “messed up” by the Stark connection.

The meta text is still *there* mind you, but it connects to stuff from the previous movies and acknowledges why MCU fans liked that Spider-Man, and isn’t obnoxious but fairly sophisticated and understanding.

…And doesn’t have a specific bone to pick with MJ, instead contextualizing her losing her knowledge as a possible cliffhanger, unlike OMD making it clear editorial wouldn’t let any marriage happen ever again.

Honestly, I agree with all this.

[Confuzzled]

It's a mix of 2000s Spider-Man: Unmasked, OMiT, Spider-Verse and OMD in that order.