Anyone Want Gwen Back?

[RobertMacQuarrie1]

Sorry about not being clear. I meant that Carlie ended up being a character for the fans to point out everything wrong with the book, because a lot of backlash could be attached to her. Like we end up remembering Carlie for everything we didn't like about BND, while others tend to blame Carlie entirely. She ends up carrying a stigma to the fans cause their wasn't an overwhelming support for her, yet the creators choose to still have her in the book. Then when she did leave, no one really cared or minded in the fandom anyways. Considering how Carlie was the first girl Peter really dated after MJ, the creators even knew she was always gonna be compared to MJ, which would be unfair for the character anyways. That's why to me, Carlie seemed more like an experiment to see what they could do for Peter's love life. Dan Slott's interview on Word Ballon hinted to that, as Carlie was difficult for the readers to like, yet he still remained optimistic that they could get another new love interest in Peter's life.

I see where you are getting at now. I kind of agree that Carlie kind of became the mascot for fans dislike of OMD. But I still don't feel she was an experiment by creators to see what they could do for Peter's love life. I feel that she was an honest attempt at creating a new love interest that would be more what the creators felt would be more appropriate for Spider-Man.

I don't think the creators knew that she was always going to be compared to MJ. I'd theorize that the creators felt there would be some dissension from those who had strong ties to Spider-Man pre-OMD, but that it would eventually die down. I think they were of the mindset that Peter's relationship with MJ was only popular because these fans supposedly didn't know any better, that they were ignorant of how things would be. But when they settled down, they would be more open to other relationships. Hence why they waited a few years before hooking up Peter and Carlie, to let the dust settle so to speak. The problem was that they misread the fans and assumed that these fans were ignorant, when in reality many were well read on the history. Not only that, but the stories they came up with were not superior to what came before, hence why the fans were not ready to accept them.

I didn't really regard Slott's Word Balloon interview as him being optimistic about reader's potentially accepting a new love interest. I feel it was him trying to justify Carlie's failure to catch on by blaming MJ's character and the supposed shadow she cast across the franchise. It wasn't Carlie's fault for being a lackluster character. It was MJ's fault for never allowing a character to stand a chance. I read it as someone trying to reconcile the fact that what he wanted to happen didn't happen, but trying to save face and make it seem like it wasn't the philosophy that was wrong, but merely circumstances out of their control.

[Aruran.]

I see where you are getting at now. I kind of agree that Carlie kind of became the mascot for fans dislike of OMD. But I still don't feel she was an experiment by creators to see what they could do for Peter's love life. I feel that she was an honest attempt at creating a new love interest that would be more what the creators felt would be more appropriate for Spider-Man.

Well for me it just seemed hypocritical that they didn't want a married Spider-Man yet would say that a relationship with Carlie was perfectly fine. I do agree that she was an honest attempt, but she along with the other girls in BND were used to figure what what they could do with Peter's love life.

I don't think the creators knew that she was always going to be compared to MJ. I'd theorize that the creators felt there would be some dissension from those who had strong ties to Spider-Man pre-OMD, but that it would eventually die down. I think they were of the mindset that Peter's relationship with MJ was only popular because these fans supposedly didn't know any better, that they were ignorant of how things would be. But when they settled down, they would be more open to other relationships. Hence why they waited a few years before hooking up Peter and Carlie, to let the dust settle so to speak. The problem was that they misread the fans and assumed that these fans were ignorant, when in reality many were well read on the history. Not only that, but the stories they came up with were not superior to what came before, hence why the fans were not ready to accept them.

They knew fully when they did OMD especially on the heels of the Raimi Trilogy that any relationship would get compared to Peter and MJ's. That's why Gwen was gonna come back, cause she could weaken the argument for Peter and MJ to get back together. But we all know why she didn't come back, hence Carlie came into the picture. To me what they learned is that no new love interest will stand a chance against MJ, cause it's going against history.

I didn't really regard Slott's Word Balloon interview as him being optimistic about reader's potentially accepting a new love interest. I feel it was him trying to justify Carlie's failure to catch on by blaming MJ's character and the supposed shadow she cast across the franchise. It wasn't Carlie's fault for being a lackluster character. It was MJ's fault for never allowing a character to stand a chance. I read it as someone trying to reconcile the fact that what he wanted to happen didn't happen, but trying to save face and make it seem like it wasn't the philosophy that was wrong, but merely circumstances out of their control.

It seemed like he was more optimistic that he could get a new love interest in. Dan Slott has stated multiple times that he wants to tell new stories, new directions. So for him, getting a new love interest in seems way more better then letting MJ back into the mix. The only thing he had against MJ is that he didn't wanna tell the same old stories with her and Peter again. The only thing that hurt their relationship was the baby in his opinion, cause he stated theres a lot of fun having them interact cause of their history and chemistry

I view it like this at the end, if Carlie was really pushed as a new, permanent love interest, they wouldn't have broken up in a year. I get that there was a lot of build-up for the fans who read the issues on the week-to-week basis, but as someone who read it all at once, it seemed really weird to sell a character who couldn't amount to much.

[VolcanikTiger86]

I don't think it's as confusing as people make it seem to be. Talking to people and reading their responses is a good way to understand what they do or do not want.

And what better way to find out what will interest fans then by asking said fans what they are interested in?

Rob my man I respect you but take a look at the past 25 pages of this forum, we have been split on 1 issue, image what could happen if the writers/editors asked fans about important things within the spidey comics. End of the day they are dammed if they do and dammed if they don’t, Marvel, DC,Image and a host of other publishers will never win because you can’t please everybody.

But that didn't mean that she couldn't.

This is very true she could have but she didn’t

But the fact of the matter is that both of those characters were played up to be greater than they actually were. They weren't bad characters. But they weren't the game changers that some fans and even some creators tried to argue that they were.

I could be wrong but I would disagree with Norah, I didn’t get the feeling that she was being played up to be great but that could be wrong, I do agree about Carlie though. She was played up to replace MJ and since a huge part of the fanbase still to this day hates OMD she was screwed from the beginning.

I understand it's meant to ground the series and interest people. But I find it funny that despite the fact that romance is considered to be one of the key aspects of the book, writers are never vetted on whether or not they can write romance.

Another Valid point but I have to admit I really don’t buy it for the romance, I buy it for the characters, storylines and action.

Bendis did have Peter on the Avengers. But he also had a lot of other characters who didn't have their own books that he gave prominence to.

Yeah but because of Bendis run on the avengers a lot of fans doesn’t think he belongs where if a well written peter was to take a supporting role then it would have been awesome, the new avengers storyline in ASM would be an example.

I see where you are getting at now. I kind of agree that Carlie kind of became the mascot for fans dislike of OMD. But I still don't feel she was an experiment by creators to see what they could do for Peter's love life. I feel that she was an honest attempt at creating a new love interest that would be more what the creators felt would be more appropriate for Spider-Man.

A failed experiment.

I don't think the creators knew that she was always going to be compared to MJ. I'd theorize that the creators felt there would be some dissension from those who had strong ties to Spider-Man pre-OMD, but that it would eventually die down. I think they were of the mindset that Peter's relationship with MJ was only popular because these fans supposedly didn't know any better, that they were ignorant of how things would be. But when they settled down, they would be more open to other relationships. Hence why they waited a few years before hooking up Peter and Carlie, to let the dust settle so to speak. The problem was that they misread the fans and assumed that these fans were ignorant, when in reality many were well read on the history. Not only that, but the stories they came up with were not superior to what came before, hence why the fans were not ready to accept them.

Ok yeah they waited a while but I could be wrong but I knew that they were going to hook up so for me it became a question of when instead of if, I could be wrong but each love interest they try to create for Peter (Not Spock) is going to have to be impressive enough that the comparisons between MJ won’t cause them to fall flat on their face, like I said before the only one that can match the history is Gwen.

I didn't really regard Slott's Word Balloon interview as him being optimistic about reader's potentially accepting a new love interest. I feel it was him trying to justify Carlie's failure to catch on by blaming MJ's character and the supposed shadow she cast across the franchise. It wasn't Carlie's fault for being a lackluster character. It was MJ's fault for never allowing a character to stand a chance. I read it as someone trying to reconcile the fact that what he wanted to happen didn't happen, but trying to save face and make it seem like it wasn't the philosophy that was wrong, but merely circumstances out of their control.

Maybe he was backtracking because they are more MJ loyalists than he thought, I don’t even think they are that many Carlie loyalists if any.

If the Spider-Gwen from Edge of Spider-Verse is really popular, Marvel might launch a new title set in that universe. It seems like a way they could incorporate Emma Stone's Gwen Stacy into the comics without undoing the death.

I would feel better if they set it in 616 if she proves popular.

Or... if Spider-Gwen is really popular, they might consider bringing back the original.

Kurt buddy I love you (bromance) but even I think that’s a bit of a stretch, Spider-Gwen won’t share the same character as the original and I’m pretty sure it was said somewhere that Slott was keeping Gwen dead so long as he was on the book.

I wonder if she would be called Spider-Girl or Spider-Woman? I would say that's probably gonna happen, considering how 2099 came back and got a new series. I'm just curious to see whether it could be successful considering most side-universes aren't.

It depends in her own universe I can see her going as spiderwoman but if she was brought over could she still go as Spider-woman when Jessica drew has the title.

Well for me it just seemed hypocritical that they didn't want a married Spider-Man yet would say that a relationship with Carlie was perfectly fine. I do agree that she was an honest attempt, but she along with the other girls in BND were used to figure what what they could do with Peter's love life.

I would have to disagree its been well documented that they feel that they need a single peter, with a single non married peter to tell some kinds of stories, the reason it’s a good plan is if the love interest doesn’t work then they can be separated easier.

They knew fully when they did OMD especially on the heels of the Raimi Trilogy that any relationship would get compared to Peter and MJ's. That's why Gwen was gonna come back, cause she could weaken the argument for Peter and MJ to get back together. But we all know why she didn't come back, hence Carlie came into the picture. To me what they learned is that no new love interest will stand a chance against MJ, cause it's going against history.

I think the Gwen coming back was on the table in the staging plans only and ultimately never went anywhere, I’m sure I have heard but what was the reason supplied why they didn’t bring back gwen. This is my main problem MJ has history so she has to be Peter ‘soulmate’ but OMD was done to explore others and a lot fans won’t let it go and want them back asap.

It seemed like he was more optimistic that he could get a new love interest in. Dan Slott has stated multiple times that he wants to tell new stories, new directions. So for him, getting a new love interest in seems way more better then letting MJ back into the mix. The only thing he had against MJ is that he didn't wanna tell the same old stories with her and Peter again. The only thing that hurt their relationship was the baby in his opinion, cause he stated theres a lot of fun having them interact cause of their history and chemistry

I view it like this at the end, if Carlie was really pushed as a new, permanent love interest, they wouldn't have broken up in a year. I get that there was a lot of build-up for the fans who read the issues on the week-to-week basis, but as someone who read it all at once, it seemed really weird to sell a character who couldn't amount to much.

I think the reason that they broke up was because Dan woke up and smelt the coffee, he saw that carlie wasn’t as popular as he needed her to be so he pushed the conclusion. The simple fact is I want new stories and new love interests that I’m prepared to give a shot, I wonder how many people will say the same.

[Eamo71]

The issue is, who cares? Gwen's death happened 40 years ago. Whatever drama and stories they can play off of that has been done hundreds of times. Quite frankly I'm tired of all the Gwen clones, relatives, secrets, etc stories they've been doing over the years. And tired of the constant flashbacks to her death scene and references to it. I say if they can bring her back in a manner that make sense, and makes for an interesting storyline then they should go for it. An iconic character like that make us the reader care a lot more than any random new character that they make up (ie Carlie Cooper). Plus Spideys supporting cast really needs a good shot in the arm.

I agree if they could bring her back with an explanation that was as brilliant as The Winter Soldier story that'd be no problem in my book.

[RobertMacQuarrie1]

Well for me it just seemed hypocritical that they didn't want a married Spider-Man yet would say that a relationship with Carlie was perfectly fine. I do agree that she was an honest attempt, but she along with the other girls in BND were used to figure what what they could do with Peter's love life.

Well of course it's hypocritical. Creators do hypocritical things all the time. Mark Waid told people to stop buying violent comics, when he himself wrote comics where a character threw a live grenade into crowd of schoolchildren. John Byrne condemned Peter David's run on the Hulk by saying he changed too much of the franchise, when he himself altered massive aspects of the character and his status quo. Chuck Dixon has recently spoken out again family unfriendly values in comics and a lack of morality, when he himself wrote stories featuring unwed teenage mothers and violent anti-heroes who solved their problems with violence. A common thread with a lot of creators is "Do as I say, not as I do."

And I do not believe that the dissolution of the marriage had anything to do with Marvel not wanting him in a committed relationship. It was about the creators involved wanting to hit the easy button and be able to tell the stories they wanted with the love interest of their preference, be it an established character or one of their own creation.

They knew fully when they did OMD especially on the heels of the Raimi Trilogy that any relationship would get compared to Peter and MJ's. That's why Gwen was gonna come back, cause she could weaken the argument for Peter and MJ to get back together. But we all know why she didn't come back, hence Carlie came into the picture. To me what they learned is that no new love interest will stand a chance against MJ, cause it's going against history.

I actually don't think the creators at the time actually took that into account. I wouldn't be surprised if the creators involved totally believed that the fandom's preference for MJ was merely ignorance on their part, and would be something that would subside once they saw how Spider-Man was supposed to be.

Gwen didn't come back because the creators didn't want her to come back. But I think Carlie was not a replacement, but an honest attempt by several creators to bring into the series the type of character they thought Spider-Man should be with. They didn't have them get together right away because of the fallout from OMD, but I again would not be surprised if the creators legitimately thought that people would not have a problem with Peter and Carlie getting together, and MJ stepping into the background to be less of a prominent player in the franchise.

It seemed like he was more optimistic that he could get a new love interest in. Dan Slott has stated multiple times that he wants to tell new stories, new directions. So for him, getting a new love interest in seems way more better then letting MJ back into the mix. The only thing he had against MJ is that he didn't wanna tell the same old stories with her and Peter again. The only thing that hurt their relationship was the baby in his opinion, cause he stated theres a lot of fun having them interact cause of their history and chemistry

Which could honestly mean anything. It's neither a confirmation or denial that he would get Peter and MJ back together. And the thing that I learned about Slott is that he tends to hinge his arguments on technicalities. Yes, he says he wants to tell new stories. But his idea of a new story could have Peter and MJ getting back together in a slightly different way than what came before. In addition, if editorial tells him to put them together, he's putting them together.

The lack of commitment of either a yes or no kind of tells me that there are plans to put the couple back together again. It's just going to go at Slott's preferred pace, since it's not a story he wanted to tell. The story he wanted to tell might have been shot down, and now he has to come up with something new involving a character that he was hoping would be written out of the book.

I view it like this at the end, if Carlie was really pushed as a new, permanent love interest, they wouldn't have broken up in a year. I get that there was a lot of build-up for the fans who read the issues on the week-to-week basis, but as someone who read it all at once, it seemed really weird to sell a character who couldn't amount to much.

That assumes that the creators had all of this planned out in their head, or that the plans weren't changed in the interim. The fact that Carlie was built up to an admittedly ridiculous degree does imply that the creators did have big plans for her character, or expected big things from her. I don't think it was so much her being a permanent love interest. But I think that there was an idea of she'd be the prominent love interest without any real challenge. That the creators would be OK with Peter and Carlie breaking up, but only after they had left the title, and even then a few years down the line.

Just because creators have an idea of where they want to go doesn't mean that they will be allowed to go where they want to go, or not be told to change their story plans due to fan reaction.

[Aruran.]

Well of course it's hypocritical. Creators do hypocritical things all the time. Mark Waid told people to stop buying violent comics, when he himself wrote comics where a character threw a live grenade into crowd of schoolchildren. John Byrne condemned Peter David's run on the Hulk by saying he changed too much of the franchise, when he himself altered massive aspects of the character and his status quo. Chuck Dixon has recently spoken out again family unfriendly values in comics and a lack of morality, when he himself wrote stories featuring unwed teenage mothers and violent anti-heroes who solved their problems with violence. A common thread with a lot of creators is "Do as I say, not as I do."

Well it seemed more stupid than anything else, especially with all the focus on a single Spider-Man.

And I do not believe that the dissolution of the marriage had anything to do with Marvel not wanting him in a committed relationship. It was about the creators involved wanting to hit the easy button and be able to tell the stories they wanted with the love interest of their preference, be it an established character or one of their own creation.

I think it did, cause him having a girlfriend makes it difficult for a ton of writers to write Spider-Man issues simultaneously.

I actually don't think the creators at the time actually took that into account. I wouldn't be surprised if the creators involved totally believed that the fandom's preference for MJ was merely ignorance on their part, and would be something that would subside once they saw how Spider-Man was supposed to be.

No, they had to take it into account. Just the fact on how much publicity Spider-Man gets, coupled with him and Mary Jane puts a lot of strain when you don't show them together. They are probably just as iconic now as Superman and Lois Lane, and its never gonna disappear.

Gwen didn't come back because the creators didn't want her to come back. But I think Carlie was not a replacement, but an honest attempt by several creators to bring into the series the type of character they thought Spider-Man should be with. They didn't have them get together right away because of the fallout from OMD, but I again would not be surprised if the creators legitimately thought that people would not have a problem with Peter and Carlie getting together, and MJ stepping into the background to be less of a prominent player in the franchise.

Remember, Quesada wanted Gwen back and Brevoort told him not to midway in the production of OMD. Brevoort's manifesto on Spider-Man kinda showed why Gwen worked coming back (product from Mephisto) but at the same time could be really damaging for Spider-Man.

With that stuff with Carlie, I agree that they taught Carlie could be a better love interest, but at the same time they really didn't plan it well then. I do think the only thing Marvel never accounted for was how much hate OMD was gonna get, like to this day it getting hate still probably surprises everyone who worked on it.

Which could honestly mean anything. It's neither a confirmation or denial that he would get Peter and MJ back together. And the thing that I learned about Slott is that he tends to hinge his arguments on technicalities. Yes, he says he wants to tell new stories. But his idea of a new story could have Peter and MJ getting back together in a slightly different way than what came before. In addition, if editorial tells him to put them together, he's putting them together.

The lack of commitment of either a yes or no kind of tells me that there are plans to put the couple back together again. It's just going to go at Slott's preferred pace, since it's not a story he wanted to tell. The story he wanted to tell might have been shot down, and now he has to come up with something new involving a character that he was hoping would be written out of the book.

TBH I just think Slott hates interviews, cause they end up spoiling his stories.

That assumes that the creators had all of this planned out in their head, or that the plans weren't changed in the interim. The fact that Carlie was built up to an admittedly ridiculous degree does imply that the creators did have big plans for her character, or expected big things from her. I don't think it was so much her being a permanent love interest. But I think that there was an idea of she'd be the prominent love interest without any real challenge. That the creators would be OK with Peter and Carlie breaking up, but only after they had left the title, and even then a few years down the line.

Just because creators have an idea of where they want to go doesn't mean that they will be allowed to go where they want to go, or not be told to change their story plans due to fan reaction.

Still, all that build up and they end up breaking them up in a year still seems stupid.

At the end of the day, Spider-Man is just one of those comics that will always be successful no matter what's going on in the story. It's a brand name that every comic book store has to have in order to a be a store. It doesn't matter for Marvel whether the fans like the story that's going on for him versus a someone with less popularity. There is a difference though when everyone enjoys Spider-Man, and we all can see it, but for Marvel I don't think it's that big of a concern for them.

[RobertMacQuarrie1]

Well it seemed more stupid than anything else, especially with all the focus on a single Spider-Man.

Yes it did. But I don't doubt that the people making it thought it made complete sense.

I think it did, cause him having a girlfriend makes it difficult for a ton of writers to write Spider-Man issues simultaneously.

But it makes it much easier to just do the same type of story seem in previous comics, television shows and movies. Especially when it's done with the girlfriend of their choice.

No, they had to take it into account. Just the fact on how much publicity Spider-Man gets, coupled with him and Mary Jane puts a lot of strain when you don't show them together. They are probably just as iconic now as Superman and Lois Lane, and its never gonna disappear.

Probably. But there are quite a few people- creators included- who don't see them that way. I've heard quite a few creators try to diminish or dismiss their relationship, trying to argue how badly the marriage damaged it, or even Gwen's death ruined a great dynamic in the book.

I think for quite a few fans they are an iconic couple. For for a later generation of fans and creators, they are a couple that never should have happened and it is the fans just being ignorant of how things should be done. I remember Marc Guggenheim- one of the original architects of Brand New Day- stating that he and the other creators were taken aback by just how attached people were to Peter and MJ. And again this was after the films came out. So while I do think they are an iconic couple, I think that quite a few creators talked themselves into believing that it was a product of circumstance rather than genuine affection, and that anyone could have been in that role in the films and be justa s popular.

Remember, Quesada wanted Gwen back and Brevoort told him not to midway in the production of OMD. Brevoort's manifesto on Spider-Man kinda showed why Gwen worked coming back (product from Mephisto) but at the same time could be really damaging for Spider-Man.

With that stuff with Carlie, I agree that they thought Carlie could be a better love interest, but at the same time they really didn't plan it well then. I do think the only thing Marvel never accounted for was how much hate OMD was gonna get, like to this day it getting hate still probably surprises everyone who worked on it.

Which again goes back to that lack of disconnect. They didn't think people would be as upset, they didn't think people would be attached to Peter and MJ, they didn't plan things through, and they thought that people would forget about it in five years time. All of this speaks to people that were looking for the easy button and assuming things would be magically better once the marriage was gone. So it's very easy to understand why people who were this ignorant of the fans and their opinions would assume that they could just introduce a new love interest to replace the old, with no greater plan other than to swap out one for the other.

TBH I just think Slott hates interviews, cause they end up spoiling his stories.

I think Slott hates previews because they spoil his stories. Interviews are OK since they allow him to be as vague as he likes.

Still, all that build up and they end up breaking them up in a year still seems stupid.

This assumes that they have well thought out plans. Or that they don't change plans halfway through.

Yes, it is stupid. But so were a lot of decisions Marvel made regarding Spider-Man over the past few years. It's stupid to have him get drunk and have sex with his roommate. It's stupid for them to retcon that so that Peter didn't get drunk, he only had one glass of wine and "got sick." It's stupid of Peter to throw himself under the bus to protect JJJ and ruin his career in the process. It's stupid that they implemented the psychic blindspot only to do away with it in an afterthought in Spider-Island. It's stupid of them to handwave Harry's resurrection with "The Goblin Serum made him better" and state in the story that he "Danced around the subject" of his return from the grave.

There have been a lot of bad decisions and stupid plot points over the years. And I doubt that there won't be any more in the future. Yes, it seems stupid. But that doesn't mean that the creators still won't go through with it if they think it will make fans happier.

At the end of the day, Spider-Man is just one of those comics that will always be successful no matter what's going on in the story. It's a brand name that every comic book store has to have in order to a be a store. It doesn't matter for Marvel whether the fans like the story that's going on for him versus a someone with less popularity. There is a difference though when everyone enjoys Spider-Man, and we all can see it, but for Marvel I don't think it's that big of a concern for them.

Actually, in that regard, it's because it's more successful that it is important not to dismiss the fans or ignore them. Because they are the driving force behind the success of the book. Yes, Marvel's not likely to cancel it if it dips in sales. But because of the name recognition of the protagonist, there is more pressure to do better in sales, and dipping from 80,000 comics sold a month to around 50,000 isn't exactly something Marvel probably is proud of. Especially when they market the change that preceded that dip in numbers as being necessary for the future success of the book.

When you are a franchise like Spider-Man's, with a large number of fans and supporters who have kept the book afloat and on top of the charts, that's not less incentive to ignore the fans. That's more incentive to listen to them, because you want to maintain that success.

To give you an example from my personal life, in regards to the percentage of sales in my company, only 20% of business is developed from new business. That means 80% of business for our company is return business. But that doesn't mean we ignore or not try to satisfy that 80% in pursuit of that 20%. We make sure that we treat that 80% right, because they can and will go somewhere else to get their product. The same thing is true with comics. People can and will go elsewhere for their product. So any sort of dip can't be regarded lightly.

[Aruran.]

But it makes it much easier to just do the same type of story seem in previous comics, television shows and movies. Especially when it's done with the girlfriend of their choice.

But there has to be a consensus between them on who is girlfriend should be. Just cause Writer A like Girl A doesn't mean that Writer B does too.

Probably. But there are quite a few people- creators included- who don't see them that way. I've heard quite a few creators try to diminish or dismiss their relationship, trying to argue how badly the marriage damaged it, or even Gwen's death ruined a great dynamic in the book.

I think for quite a few fans they are an iconic couple. For for a later generation of fans and creators, they are a couple that never should have happened and it is the fans just being ignorant of how things should be done. I remember Marc Guggenheim- one of the original architects of Brand New Day- stating that he and the other creators were taken aback by just how attached people were to Peter and MJ. And again this was after the films came out. So while I do think they are an iconic couple, I think that quite a few creators talked themselves into believing that it was a product of circumstance rather than genuine affection, and that anyone could have been in that role in the films and be justa s popular.

Yeah I agree that it's a generational thing for Peter and MJ. I know for sure anyone born from the 90s onward would've been exposed to Peter and MJ as a couple with all the TV shows, movies, and video games. Only in the last 7 years there has been a dip in the couple appearing in the media, but at the same time no one else separates them selves as a legitimate option besides Gwen.

Which again goes back to that lack of disconnect. They didn't think people would be as upset, they didn't think people would be attached to Peter and MJ, they didn't plan things through, and they thought that people would forget about it in five years time. All of this speaks to people that were looking for the easy button and assuming things would be magically better once the marriage was gone. So it's very easy to understand why people who were this ignorant of the fans and their opinions would assume that they could just introduce a new love interest to replace the old, with no greater plan other than to swap out one for the other.

It's also the side effect of living in the digital age. It becomes easier to remember anything that's happened in the last 10 years as opposed to living in the 70s and trying the same thing. You also become more aware of the opinions of others, so it can either strengthen or weaken your view. The relationship won't go away, cause we can always find references to it online referring to old stories.

This assumes that they have well thought out plans. Or that they don't change plans halfway through.

Yes, it is stupid. But so were a lot of decisions Marvel made regarding Spider-Man over the past few years. It's stupid to have him get drunk and have sex with his roommate. It's stupid for them to retcon that so that Peter didn't get drunk, he only had one glass of wine and "got sick." It's stupid of Peter to throw himself under the bus to protect JJJ and ruin his career in the process. It's stupid that they implemented the psychic blindspot only to do away with it in an afterthought in Spider-Island. It's stupid of them to handwave Harry's resurrection with "The Goblin Serum made him better" and state in the story that he "Danced around the subject" of his return from the grave.

There have been a lot of bad decisions and stupid plot points over the years. And I doubt that there won't be any more in the future. Yes, it seems stupid. But that doesn't mean that the creators still won't go through with it if they think it will make fans happier.

Agreed.
It's just that with the BND stories, they rarely seemed to think about the long term effects they could have, like Peter being blacklisted.

Actually, in that regard, it's because it's more successful that it is important not to dismiss the fans or ignore them. Because they are the driving force behind the success of the book. Yes, Marvel's not likely to cancel it if it dips in sales. But because of the name recognition of the protagonist, there is more pressure to do better in sales, and dipping from 80,000 comics sold a month to around 50,000 isn't exactly something Marvel probably is proud of. Especially when they market the change that preceded that dip in numbers as being necessary for the future success of the book.

When you are a franchise like Spider-Man's, with a large number of fans and supporters who have kept the book afloat and on top of the charts, that's not less incentive to ignore the fans. That's more incentive to listen to them, because you want to maintain that success.

To give you an example from my personal life, in regards to the percentage of sales in my company, only 20% of business is developed from new business. That means 80% of business for our company is return business. But that doesn't mean we ignore or not try to satisfy that 80% in pursuit of that 20%. We make sure that we treat that 80% right, because they can and will go somewhere else to get their product. The same thing is true with comics. People can and will go elsewhere for their product. So any sort of dip can't be regarded lightly.

But Marvel doesn't suffer if Spider-Man suffers, all the LCS do. Spider-Man is a requirement for every LCS to be considered an LCS, his popularity helps the stores just as much as Batman,Superman, and the other big named series. It's extremely hard for Spider-Man to suffer in sales or popularity, cause he is so well known. When his sale numbers drop, it cause there is a general lack of interest in a lot of different series along with Spider-Man. Like there are a ton of people who will religiously buy Spider-Man comics until they die, and that's still more then a lot of other series. So for Marvel, while it might not be the smartest situation, but they're still profitable. And at the end of the day, that's all that matters for them.

[RobertMacQuarrie1]

But there has to be a consensus between them on who is girlfriend should be. Just cause Writer A like Girl A doesn't mean that Writer B does too.

Which is exactly the problem the creators had with early BND. Each creator had their own idea of whom Peter should be with.

Again, it goes back to the notion of the creators making an assumption on behalf of the fanbase and not listening to them, and it biting them in return. I think the creators were so focused on the fact that getting rid of the marriage and removing MJ would make things easier that they didn't think what to do next. The fact that they were focused on what made things easier rather what made for a more substantial story, or believing that making things easier would lead to a more substantial story, showed that their evaluation regarding the franchise was flawed and superficial. They focused so much on removing an arbitrary obstacle that they never really focused on what came after, believing erroneously that things that came after would simply be easier for them and therefore better for the fans.

Yeah I agree that it's a generational thing for Peter and MJ. I know for sure anyone born from the 90s onward would've been exposed to Peter and MJ as a couple with all the TV shows, movies, and video games. Only in the last 7 years there has been a dip in the couple appearing in the media, but at the same time no one else separates them selves as a legitimate option besides Gwen.

And no one aside from Gwen has really been shipped with Peter in any significant way in any other media, aside from the ASM movies and we know how those ended for her.

But I do think that the issue was that a lot of creators who worked on the book or who currently work on the book are from that earlier generation, one where MJ wasn't necessarily Peter's girl and was more the girl who got away. And the notion that she was to be elevated to a higher position and prominence in the series may not sit right with some, which would reflect how they would evaluate the series from then on. Hence why they would regard people who liked Peter and MJ as a couple as merely being ignorant of the larger picture, and if they were simply exposed to a different way of looking at things that they would come around. More than once I've heard people argue that the reason that people rejected BND was because of the supposed culture shock of not being exposed to a single Spider-Man for over twenty years, instead of other reasons, assuming that these fans had never been exposed to a single Spider-Man in any other form or medium.

It's very easy to assume that the person you disagree with is doing so not out of a difference of opinion, but out of ignorance, and if they were to see the light so to speak that they would then come around to your position.

It's also the side effect of living in the digital age. It becomes easier to remember anything that's happened in the last 10 years as opposed to living in the 70s and trying the same thing. You also become more aware of the opinions of others, so it can either strengthen or weaken your view. The relationship won't go away, cause we can always find references to it online referring to old stories.

I'd say it's also easier to remember things from the 70's, or to be exposed to people who can counter the pre-written narrative.

For example, for years I heard through the traditional sources the familiar story of Steve Ditko leaving the book because he wanted the Green Goblin to be an unknown agent and not Norman Osborn. It was only when I started going online more that I learned that Steve wanted Norman to be the Goblin, and was setting him up as the Goblin for months.

So someone from Marvel can say that Peter and MJ only got together a month before the marriage, but that is easily countered by someone pointing out- with references- that they had been together for four years.

Agreed.
It's just that with the BND stories, they rarely seemed to think about the long term effects they could have, like Peter being blacklisted.

Which goes back to that notion that they were looking more for the easy answer rather than truly analyzing what people would want.

But Marvel doesn't suffer if Spider-Man suffers, all the LCS do. Spider-Man is a requirement for every LCS to be considered an LCS, his popularity helps the stores just as much as Batman,Superman, and the other big named series. It's extremely hard for Spider-Man to suffer in sales or popularity, cause he is so well known. When his sale numbers drop, it cause there is a general lack of interest in a lot of different series along with Spider-Man. Like there are a ton of people who will religiously buy Spider-Man comics until they die, and that's still more then a lot of other series. So for Marvel, while it might not be the smartest situation, but they're still profitable. And at the end of the day, that's all that matters for them.

Marvel may not suffer as a whole, but the Spider-Man offices still need to pull their own weight, like any division in an organization. For example, the outside sales offices in my company might do well, but that doesn't mean that I or my department gets to slack off. And if one department doesn't do well, then that could affect other departments. I was laid off from one job not because my department wasn't pulling it's own weight, but because the outside sales department didn't make enough sales during the year meaning that they had to cut back on other departments to stay afloat.

The Spider-Man offices still need to justify their expenses. And if they make a controversial change, on the auspices that they would bring in more business, which corresponds to a increased cost of production due to the fact that they were bringing on more creators than before, and that results in lower sales than what they promised or predicted, then it doesn't matter if Marvel as a whole does well. The Spider-Offices still need to prove that they can be profitable. And if they aren't, even if they dip a little, then it's likely that there will be a change in the direction of the books. Marvel is still a business, and all facets need to show that they can pull a profit. And the rub is that if the Spider-Man books have proved that they can sell over 80,000 copies, and then they start selling around 50,000, then you can bet that there will be meetings asking why the book isn't performing as well as it did in the past.

[Kencana]

I would like Gwen Stacy to came back. No one in comics stays dead anyway.... except for Uncle Ben (and about a hundred women).