What kind of spoilers should Marvel reveal?

[Mister Mets]

I've noticed in certain discussions about the current comics a desire to have information about story beats that might not happen for some time. At the moment, it's questions of how long Parker Industries is going to last, whether there are any plans for Peter and Mary Jane to reconcile, whether Black Cat will remain a criminal mastermind, or whatever. In the last few years, it was questions about whether Doctor Octopus had really killed Peter Parker's mind, or whether Roderick Kingsley was really killed off by Phil Urich.

In some cases, the answer might be several years away, and it's also entirely possible that whatever is planned now might be changed when the story is actually published. Often there are going to be story beats that have to occur prior to a particular development (If Slott had blurted out that Aunt May was going to get married in Amazing Spider-Man #600 before Marvel published J Jonah Jameson Sr's first appearance, fans would be unaware of many relevant aspects of the future storyline, which makes discussions premature.)

The question I'm wondering is what kind of stuff do you want to know about the comics in advance? And how far in advance? What should Marvel reveal about the futures of the series?

[Phantom Roxas]

Basically reveal whatever is the core premise of a story. I'm not asking for spoilers, and I do think it's rather odd for people to ask questions that they know to be spoilers, but I also think that there are some lengths that may be considered too far when it comes to avoiding spoilers. While they certainly couldn't reveal that Peter was coming back, statements like "Peter Parker is dead and is never coming back" is a lie. I'm not sure how else one could have responded, and even a vague, non-committal answer could be interpreted to point to either Peter's resurrection or a certainty that he was dead, but since a response like that is usually given to shut down people asking the question, it's a repeated lie that ends up becoming the default.

Or something like Agent Venom joining the Guardians of the Galaxy. Darkest Hours wasn't finished at the time of that announcement (I can't remember if it had even started yet), but since there were questions regarding the transition from Darkest Hours to Guardians of the Galaxy, some answers were given like it was either a new host, and neither the host nor the symbiote could reveal their identity because they were acting under deception, or that the symbiote was merely using the appearance of Agent Venom to honor his memory, both possibilities being offered to allude to the possibility that Flash would most likely die in Darkest Hours, which of course didn't happen.

Though that's a bit different from Superior, where the most to point towards Peter's resurrection was Ghost Peter, but after Troubled Mind, it didn't seem like there was anything to suggest Peter would come back except maybe a suspicion that things will return to a particular status quo. Peter's death was, at that point, a certainty. I'm not quite sure how to explain it, but I think in a situation like that, saying he wasn't coming back isn't a spoiler, since it's suggesting that a particular story isn't going to be told, yet confirming a resurrection would be pointing towards a story. With Agent Venom, it was a case where either scenario would have been a spoiler. Saying he died would be confirming that Flash would die, though I'm not sure how much of a spoiler that'd be considered in light of all the publicity a story called "Death of Wolverine" got, including statements that he would be dying. The very announcement of Agent Venom in Guardians of the Galaxy spoiled that the symbiote would survive Darkest Hours, whereas before then, there were hints along the lines of "Flash or the symbiote - or both" could die, so of the potential fates of the characters, Flash's was still a mystery, and he was certainly at risk in Darkest Hours. It's just that lies were offered to maintain the tension of Darkest Hours.

So I have no preference on the kind of spoilers Marvel should reveal. I just don't think their method of avoiding spoilers should be to lie.

[cyberhubbs]

I'm not sure it's a lie when the person saying it responds in the most dramatic and amused way possible. Technically, sure. But readers should know better by now.

[Mister Mets]

I'm not sure it's a lie when the person saying it responds in the most dramatic and amused way possible. Technically, sure. But readers should know better by now.

I get the complaint, but I'm okay with "lies" that are over the top, and presented in that way.

The problem would be if it were something mundane (IE- a lie about a plausible creative team) or something meant to trick readers into buying something they wouldn't otherwise buy on a false premise.

[Phantom Roxas]

And I think the issue I was presenting with Agent Venom was a false premise.

[Mister Mets]

And I think the issue I was presenting with Agent Venom was a false premise.

Maybe. I don't fully remember what Marvel promised about that one, but it raises some interesting questions. Marvel would want to hype a multi-part story and to suggest that the stakes are high, even if nothing changes for the major characters. Announcing that would be a spoiler, so they want to avoid that. This also cuts to another aspect of spoilers: there's much more to a comic than particular plot beats. Tone, pacing, characterization and storytelling matter, so a story can feel to a reader that it has high stakes even if nothing of consequence happens to the characters. I can understand someone being bothered if they think that reader's experience of a given story is shaped by expectations driven by the hype. That can lend greater gravity to certain scenes, but lead to a reader being underwhelmed by the final result, after buying a product they would oherwise not.

When Agent Venom was announced as joining the Guardians of the Galaxy before "Darkest Hours" came out, that complicated the promotions. Marvel would prefer fans of the Venom monthly (which lasted 40+ issues) check out that title, but announcements would have to be vague in order to not reveal Venom's fate in Superior. Superior Spider-Man #25 came out in January 2014, while Guardians of the Galaxy #14 with Venom joining the team came out in April 2014, so there was enough time for anyone who's mind was changed due to the outcome of "Darkest Hours" to alter their preorders.

[cyberhubbs]

I get the complaint, but I'm okay with "lies" that are over the top, and presented in that way.

The problem would be if it were something mundane (IE- a lie about a plausible creative team) or something meant to trick readers into buying something they wouldn't otherwise buy on a false premise.

I remember during Hickman's Fantastic Four run he said in an interview that Johnny would not be returning from the dead while he was still on the book. It was stated fairly matter of factly. I believed him, though I did assume that just meant it'd be explored by the next writer, maybe as something to kick off his run. Johnny, of course, did come back to life during Hickman's run.

[Phantom Roxas]

Maybe. I don't fully remember what Marvel promised about that one, but it raises some interesting questions. Marvel would want to hype a multi-part story and to suggest that the stakes are high, even if nothing changes for the major characters. Announcing that would be a spoiler, so they want to avoid that. This also cuts to another aspect of spoilers: there's much more to a comic than particular plot beats. Tone, pacing, characterization and storytelling matter, so a story can feel to a reader that it has high stakes even if nothing of consequence happens to the characters. I can understand someone being bothered if they think that reader's experience of a given story is shaped by expectations driven by the hype. That can lend greater gravity to certain scenes, but lead to a reader being underwhelmed by the final result, after buying a product they would oherwise not.

When Agent Venom was announced as joining the Guardians of the Galaxy before "Darkest Hours" came out, that complicated the promotions. Marvel would prefer fans of the Venom monthly (which lasted 40+ issues) check out that title, but announcements would have to be vague in order to not reveal Venom's fate in Superior. Superior Spider-Man #25 came out in January 2014, while Guardians of the Galaxy #14 with Venom joining the team came out in April 2014, so there was enough time for anyone who's mind was changed due to the outcome of "Darkest Hours" to alter their preorders.

Darkest Hours was to rely on how, with the Venom book cancelled, they wouldn't have anything to go back to, and that was presented to allude to the possibility that they could die. The announcement of Venom joining the Guardians - which was in November - meant that this particular aspect of the hype would fail. That announcement meant there would be a book for them to go back to after Darkest Hours, so the idea that the symbiote was disguising itself to cover up Flash's death was generated in order to maintain the possibility that Flash could still die. Darkest Hours was presented as a potential epilogue to the Venom series, while the announcement of Guardians of the Galaxy made it so that Darkest Hours had to instead contribute to a bridge between the Venom ongoing and Guardians of the Galaxy.

I've had issues with people who project their own expectations onto a story, and act like it was somehow the fault of Marvel for lying about that. Iron Man 3 comes to mind, as that might give an example of what I'm thinking of. The Mandarin twist? People were bothered by that, but I think that was handled very well, so I've got no issues with it. But one in particular that baffles me is how someone swore that Pepper was going to become Rescue in that movie, based on part of the trailer where Pepper was being pumped with Extremis, or a fuzzy and unclear image for a suit that ended up being part of the Iron Legion, which someone mistook as the Rescue armor. Naturally, they accused Marvel of lying, when it was just offering interpretations that Marvel (Well, I mean Kevin Feige, Robert Downey Jr, Gwyneth Paltrow, or anyone else actually involved in the movie rather than the nebulous concept of "Marvel" as a singular identity) had never pointed towards. With Darkest Hours, we were told that Flash was most likely to do, and that we shouldn't assume it was Flash in Guardians of the Galaxy.