Brevoort on NEW WAYS TO DIE

[clonegeek]

Yeah, pretty sure you’ve stated before, it was never about sales. It was - and remains - a preference.

You wrote Renew Your Vows. It sold great. There’s a readership there, even for a spin-off disconnected from the 616.

Sometimes that’s all it is. Every leadership brings its own preferences into the mix, no matter if it’s Spidey, X-Men, or over at DC.

For example how Didio distain for legacy characters like Dick and Wally lead to storylines like Ric and Hero's in Crisis. The Spidey Office needs leadership that's not entrenched in the OMD mindset.

[DT Winslow]

For example how Didio distain for legacy characters like Dick and Wally lead to storylines like Ric and Hero's in Crisis. The Spidey Office needs leadership that's not entrenched in the OMD mindset.

Why do they need that?

[Dan Slott]

The Spidey Office needs leadership that's not entrenched in the OMD mindset.

Nick was neither an editor on OMD...
...or the BND era that followed.
Nick came on as the editor many years later, at the very end of Superior in 2014.
The "leadership" behind the choices made to do a story/status quo change like OMD is Marvel.
Anyone who is an editor now, or who will be an editor later, understands the assignment.
Marvel doesn't want the 616/mainstream version of Peter Parker to be married.
Someone who isn't on board with that wouldn't get the assignment to edit and/or write the book.
The "Brain Trust", "Web-Heads", me, Nick Spencer, and now Zeb Wells, all took the job knowing that was the assignment.
That's not going to change for the next editor or writer.
Even if they're someone who's enjoyed editing or writing a book that's a flashback to that era.
Or, like me, someone who's pitched and written stories in alt-universes (Renew Your Vows) or alt-timelines (Amazing Fantasy #1000) where Peter & MJ are married.
None of this is said to be cruel or dismissive.
It's said, just as it was over a decade ago, to be straight up and factual about the matter.

[ARkadelphia]

Nick was neither an editor on OMD...
...or the BND era that followed.
Nick came on as the editor many years later, at the very end of Superior in 2014.
The "leadership" behind the choices made to do a story/status quo change like OMD is Marvel.
Anyone who is an editor now, or who will be an editor later, understands the assignment.
Marvel doesn't want the 616/mainstream version of Peter Parker to be married.
Someone who isn't on board with that wouldn't get the assignment to edit and/or write the book.
The "Brain Trust", "Web-Heads", me, Nick Spencer, and now Zeb Wells, all took the job knowing that was the assignment.
That's not going to change for the next editor or writer.
Even if they're someone who's enjoyed editing or writing a book that's a flashback to that era.
Or, like me, someone who's pitched and written stories in alt-universes (Renew Your Vows) or alt-timelines (Amazing Fantasy #1000) where Peter & MJ are married.
None of this is said to be cruel or dismissive.
It's said, just as it was over a decade ago, to be straight up and factual about the matter.

Who is this mysterious person named “Marvel” that you refer to? I’m only being half sarcastic here. What you refer to as “Marvel” must actually be a person or multiple people. This person or people it would seem can either change, (whether through attrition, firing, or death), or simply change their minds about something, as people are sometimes apt to do. The way you describe this “Marvel” being is cryptic, like it’s not even a person, but more like a brick wall that is not open to new ideas and never will be. Am I missing something here? Again, not trying to be wise (okay, maybe a lil bit) but the directives you allude to must be coming from an actual person or people.

[Venomsaurus]

Nick was neither an editor on OMD...
...or the BND era that followed.
Nick came on as the editor many years later, at the very end of Superior in 2014.
The "leadership" behind the choices made to do a story/status quo change like OMD is Marvel.
Anyone who is an editor now, or who will be an editor later, understands the assignment.
Marvel doesn't want the 616/mainstream version of Peter Parker to be married.
Someone who isn't on board with that wouldn't get the assignment to edit and/or write the book.
The "Brain Trust", "Web-Heads", me, Nick Spencer, and now Zeb Wells, all took the job knowing that was the assignment.
That's not going to change for the next editor or writer.
Even if they're someone who's enjoyed editing or writing a book that's a flashback to that era.
Or, like me, someone who's pitched and written stories in alt-universes (Renew Your Vows) or alt-timelines (Amazing Fantasy #1000) where Peter & MJ are married.
None of this is said to be cruel or dismissive.
It's said, just as it was over a decade ago, to be straight up and factual about the matter.

I look forward to the day this opinion shifts and whoever is at the top sees the larger appeal of married Peter.

[Matt14teg]

Is it just me or is thread turning into dejavu again.

[Matt14teg]

Who is this mysterious person named “Marvel” that you refer to? I’m only being half sarcastic here. What you refer to as “Marvel” must actually be a person or multiple people. This person or people it would seem can either change, (whether through attrition, firing, or death), or simply change their minds about something, as people are sometimes apt to do. The way you describe this “Marvel” being is cryptic, like it’s not even a person, but more like a brick wall that is not open to new ideas and never will be. Am I missing something here? Again, not trying to be wise (okay, maybe a lil bit) but the directives you allude to must be coming from an actual person or people.

Its the one above all obviously. On a side note its so weird having all these random statements for PR from editorials/Slott on the marriage at this point like goddamn.

[Jman27]

Is it just me or is thread turning into dejavu again.

it probably is

[Vortex85]

I think Marvel here refers to a few different people in senior positions who are above editor level and will not change their minds.

CB Cebulski said “its a preference at Marvel for Spider-Man not to be married, not a mandate” at a conference this year. And even threw out that he may be married again if they thought it made “the best story ever”. However, I think this is more a strong and well understand preference such that anyone questioning or trying to pitch the marriage may be dismissed or simply not get the job of editing or writing the character.

[clonegeek]

Nick was neither an editor on OMD...
...or the BND era that followed.
Nick came on as the editor many years later, at the very end of Superior in 2014.
The "leadership" behind the choices made to do a story/status quo change like OMD is Marvel.
Anyone who is an editor now, or who will be an editor later, understands the assignment.
Marvel doesn't want the 616/mainstream version of Peter Parker to be married.
Someone who isn't on board with that wouldn't get the assignment to edit and/or write the book.
The "Brain Trust", "Web-Heads", me, Nick Spencer, and now Zeb Wells, all took the job knowing that was the assignment.
That's not going to change for the next editor or writer.
Even if they're someone who's enjoyed editing or writing a book that's a flashback to that era.
Or, like me, someone who's pitched and written stories in alt-universes (Renew Your Vows) or alt-timelines (Amazing Fantasy #1000) where Peter & MJ are married.
None of this is said to be cruel or dismissive.
It's said, just as it was over a decade ago, to be straight up and factual about the matter.

What regressive, out of touch reasons does Marvel have for not wanting Peter to be married? People like Nick Lowe were around at the time Quesada was EiC, thus the influance still lingers.

Sooner or later the main Peter will get his marriage restored because Marvel is not a static company- its mangitoral make-up changes overtime. It might be another decade or so but I'm young so I can wait.

[Matt14teg]

I think Marvel here refers to a few different people in senior positions who are above editor level and will not change their minds.

CB Cebulski said “its a preference at Marvel for Spider-Man not to be married, not a mandate” at a conference this year. And even threw out that he may be married again if they thought it made “the best story ever”. However, I think this is more a strong and well understand preference such that anyone questioning or trying to pitch the marriage may be dismissed or simply not get the job of editing or writing the character.

Lmao to me i think its PR moves at best, its kinda noted how the tone has changed around a lot of higher ups discussing this kind of stuff. I don't think anyone can doubt the presence of the online community talking about Spiderman in general, now you got a lot of online media trying to fan these flames harder with wells run. I'm guessing the expected output of current spider office would be that the fans need to shut up about the marriage & pursue the current line of products in a "different way", & it used to be more of a harsher tone of message but now seems to be something of a diplomatic approach on this subject like a necessity of writing.

It's not hard to say that wells run is literally dominated by OMD/MJ talks everywhere online, gang wars was probably the last piece of traction that was around this level & spiderboy to an extent. Individualy speaking online it just kind of looks to me like spiderman 616 has a black eye in terms of reputation, but hey sales are up right that's all that matters.

[clonegeek]

Lmao to me i think its PR moves at best, its kinda noted how the tone has changed around a lot of higher ups discussing this kind of stuff. I don't think anyone can doubt the presence of the online community talking about Spiderman in general, now you got a lot of online media trying to fan these flames harder with wells run. I'm guessing the expected output of current spider office would be that the fans need to shut up about the marriage & pursue the current line of products in a "different way", & it used to be more of a harsher tone of message but now seems to be something of a diplomatic approach on this subject like a necessity of writing.

It's not hard to say that wells run is literally dominated by OMD/MJ talks everywhere online, gang wars was probably the last piece of traction that was around this level & spiderboy to an extent. Individualy speaking online it just kind of looks to me like spiderman 616 has a black eye in terms of reputation, but hey sales are up right that's all that matters.

Honestly the run at this point feels like Wally West in the months following Heroes in Crisis.

[WebLurker]

I can guarantee no one at Marvel feels that way.

Let's just say, at this point, I think Rules of Acquisition #39 and 190 apply.

[Dred]

Nick was neither an editor on OMD...
...or the BND era that followed.
Nick came on as the editor many years later, at the very end of Superior in 2014.
The "leadership" behind the choices made to do a story/status quo change like OMD is Marvel.
Anyone who is an editor now, or who will be an editor later, understands the assignment.
Marvel doesn't want the 616/mainstream version of Peter Parker to be married.
Someone who isn't on board with that wouldn't get the assignment to edit and/or write the book.
The "Brain Trust", "Web-Heads", me, Nick Spencer, and now Zeb Wells, all took the job knowing that was the assignment.
That's not going to change for the next editor or writer.
Even if they're someone who's enjoyed editing or writing a book that's a flashback to that era.
Or, like me, someone who's pitched and written stories in alt-universes (Renew Your Vows) or alt-timelines (Amazing Fantasy #1000) where Peter & MJ are married.
None of this is said to be cruel or dismissive.
It's said, just as it was over a decade ago, to be straight up and factual about the matter.

Editorial operate under the idea that a permanent state of dissatisfaction is preferable while the universe twists itself in pretzels to accomplish, what? Peter being stuck in a state of arrested development for the rest of eternity because an office full of people who are married think being married sucks?

I'm glad this kind of editorial mindset of being forever stuck in the past, before the turn of the century, is starting to fade. Heck even when stuck in the past, how much do they hate the Fantastic Four because they came in on the ground floor with a married couple? Do they think it's impossible to tell good F4 stories because marriage makes characters too old for a young hip audience to relate to? As if every other form of popular long form media doesn't contain marriage in it, including your own comics.

I understand that no writer, given the opportunity, is going to dodge the chance to play in the Spider-man toy box because it's the biggest name you can put your pen to, likely everyone who's ever written for Marvel in living memory is a huge Spider-man fan, and it has the potential to transform a career for the better in a way few comics can. I can't blame the writers for taking the job. And you have to play by their rules or you don't get the job.

If you're so willing to give insight into how the sausage gets made, how it's all editorials fault, can you tell us how common is it for writers to talk about this decades long holding pattern in Spider-man? How often is there even an open conversation about it in your offices or communal messaging areas? Or is it just a moratorium, do what the boss says, and if you want to pitch it pitch it as a What If or Alternate universe like RNV?

I'm primarily a DC fan these days. Haven't bought a Spider-man comic in years and I can plainly say OMD was the start of my distancing from Spider-man and Marvel as a whole. DC had basically identical edicts to this in place under a man who I'm glad is gone now, and the comic that suffered this sort of edict the hardest was and is my favorite superhero (The Flash). All I can say as one small voice is that, for me at least, the lifting of this hatred of progress and love and growth has been the best thing to happen to the franchise in 15 years. The Flash has a lot of similarities to Spider-man, and they've made a lot of the same mistakes. But at least they eventually recognized those mistakes.

[Garlador]

Okay... so... *cracks knuckles*

Nick was neither an editor on OMD...
...or the BND era that followed.
Nick came on as the editor many years later, at the very end of Superior in 2014.

Clonegeek's statement that they "needs leadership that's not entrenched in the OMD mindset" likely doesn't target specifically Nick Lowe; just whoever IS calling the shots. Quesada, Lowe, Cebulski, the ghost of Stan Lee, a disembodied Avi Arad... I don't think anyone cares WHO, per se, but having folks like Lowe be the fall guys for this over and over and be the "yeah, we hated the marriage in the main comics and think the married version you spent decades with and invested hundreds of dollars supporting is inferior" targets is, well, cowardly if someone up top IS calling the shots but lets those under them get the criticism and harassment for that decision. I had a boss like that, and it was a toxic relationship working under him when I took the fall for every bad idea he had.

The "leadership" behind the choices made to do a story/status quo change like OMD is Marvel.
Anyone who is an editor now, or who will be an editor later, understands the assignment.
Marvel doesn't want the 616/mainstream version of Peter Parker to be married.
Someone who isn't on board with that wouldn't get the assignment to edit and/or write the book.
The "Brain Trust", "Web-Heads", me, Nick Spencer, and now Zeb Wells, all took the job knowing that was the assignment.

Who is this mysterious person named “Marvel” that you refer to? I’m only being half sarcastic here. What you refer to as “Marvel” must actually be a person or multiple people. This person or people it would seem can either change, (whether through attrition, firing, or death), or simply change their minds about something, as people are sometimes apt to do. The way you describe this “Marvel” being is cryptic, like it’s not even a person, but more like a brick wall that is not open to new ideas and never will be. Am I missing something here? Again, not trying to be wise (okay, maybe a lil bit) but the directives you allude to must be coming from an actual person or people.

Echoing this. Who is "Marvel" here, as others have asked? We've heard so many contradictory things at this point - about who has the power and who is calling the shots and who should take the blame. And, as I said, that isn't fair to those "taking the assignment" if their hands are bound and yet they're sent to the frontlines to take the criticism.

(Spider-Man Office every time a reader complains and asks who's responsible for keeping One More Day in canon...)

That's not going to change for the next editor or writer.

And let me respectfully continue to say that's a garbage mindset for any leadership to have, and it remains THE ONE AND ONLY REASON I have not purchased a Spider-Man comic in the 616 universe in over 16 years, despite being a huge Spider-Man reader since before the marriage was even a thing.

I'm not singling Spider-Man editorial out on this. I said the same thing to DC about their attempts to erase Wally West's marriage and do away with Superman's marriage. They used the same excuses ("It ages the heroes", "it's not relatable", etc.) I stopped buying those books. However, unlike with Spider-Man - despite having the SAME exact reasons leveraged for a character like Wally - the marriages are now back and reestablished. And people aren't flooding the Flash and Superman message boards going "I hate that they brought Clark & Lois back together!" and "ugh, why couldn't they keep Wally young, hip, and single so he could bang other hot super chicks or something?". They've CELEBRATED it.


True to my word, I'm back into these comics - after a long hiatus - and reading these stories and seeing how well they're done with marriage and family, systematically dismantling every reason Marvel has used against Spider-Man's marriage, has only reinvigorated my disappointment that Marvel's best hero is still largely overshadowed by a Satanic deal with the devil to trade his family's happiness away so his ancient aunt can live longer against her own wishes and he can then avoid any knowledge or responsibility for said decision. It is an albatross around the book's neck, and if this is how "Marvel" wants it, then it just sucks for both readers and creators alike. I don't blame other writers for publicly stating they don't want to work on the book given the number of unhappy fans is just too sizable to overcome so long as the one big thing readers want changed sticks around like a never-ending stink cloud.

Even if they're someone who's enjoyed editing or writing a book that's a flashback to that era.

Thank God for "Lost Hunt"....

Or, like me, someone who's pitched and written stories in alt-universes (Renew Your Vows) or alt-timelines (Amazing Fantasy #1000) where Peter & MJ are married.

Also routinely mentioned as the best things to come out of Spider-Man books in years...

None of this is said to be cruel or dismissive.
It's said, just as it was over a decade ago, to be straight up and factual about the matter.

We were also told, decades ago, that fans would ultimately "get over it" after a few years. And... well, here we are. I'm watching Adam Driver in a movie complaining about "One More Day" and how it ruined the character. When Hollywood screenwriters are slamming it years later, I think it's beyond just a niche audience licking their wounds; it's mainstream and prevalent even outside of comic circles.

Is it just me or is thread turning into dejavu again.

Brevoort bringing up One More Day again will do that. And he brings it up in the context that he knows it turned readers off and that certain stories like New Ways to Die brought back some lapsed fans. I'm sure it did, as I mentioned earlier a lot of my Venom-loving forum buddies were thrilled Eddie suddenly was back in a role that wasn't... what we had before. But it's like plugging a few holes in the ship and saying the waist-deep water is fine so long as you can keep afloat. The main problems remained. I'm happy to read Venom again myself; not so eager for Peter's book.

Lmao to me i think its PR moves at best, its kinda noted how the tone has changed around a lot of higher ups discussing this kind of stuff. I don't think anyone can doubt the presence of the online community talking about Spiderman in general, now you got a lot of online media trying to fan these flames harder with wells run. I'm guessing the expected output of current spider office would be that the fans need to shut up about the marriage & pursue the current line of products in a "different way", & it used to be more of a harsher tone of message but now seems to be something of a diplomatic approach on this subject like a necessity of writing.

As someone else posted earlier, at least we're not hearing creatives joke about raping and murdering Mary Jane anymore. I hope. But that's really indicative of a larger problem.

Honestly, Lowe's responses of "I'm sorry you don't enjoy the book, have a nice day" are absolutely the best approach for him, because there really is nothing that he CAN say that would appease and satisfy irate fans still demanding One More Day be fixed, the marriage restored, and decades of continuity re-established and respected. "Actions speak louder than words", and if what Slott is saying is true, then Lowe has no power or ability to do the actions asked of him by readers. So... "sorry you don't enjoy the book, have a nice day" it is.

It's not hard to say that wells run is literally dominated by OMD/MJ talks everywhere online, gang wars was probably the last piece of traction that was around this level & spiderboy to an extent. Individualy speaking online it just kind of looks to me like spiderman 616 has a black eye in terms of reputation, but hey sales are up right that's all that matters.

Look, "Marvel" knows this. I don't care who you direct it at - Slott, Cebulski, Lowe, Feige, Bog Iger himself, etc. - they KNOW One More Day is utterly despised. They KNOW that readers want it undone. They KNOW that even the best stories since then have that shadow hanging over it.

They KNOW married dad Peter was liked by millions of people watching Across the Spider-Verse. They KNOW Slott's pitch for Renew Your Vows was well-liked. They KNOW that DC has seen success restoring marriages to some of their biggest heroes. They KNOW that kids can related to heroes who grew up and started families - from The Flash to Batman to Goku to dozens of others. They KNOW.

And I think they KNOW we aren't going to stop asking for it back.

And it's not just dinosaurs like me. I've seen the recent polls at sites like IGN and Reddit and Twitter and overwhelmingly seeing people vote for it back. My daughter is four years old and she won't stop annoying me about playing "Spider-Man" with me, and pretending to be baby Mayday crawling over her Spider-Dad's face and jumping off the furniture, and that's just what she picked up on her own.

And, well, we continue to root for it because it's what our hero fought for. It's because he was the hero so many of us kids looked up to, because he never gave up. He never let the devil win. So why in the hell would a real Spider-Man fan ever give up on their hero getting back the thing he valued most?