Thread Drift: Will One More Day ever be reversed?

[boots]

Mr.Slott,
Is it possible to have the questions in my previous post answered openly and honestly without changing the subject or deflecting?
Those questions being;

"What exactly are these "obstacles"? Why is the marriage "off the table", and yet having Peter and MJ in a relationship isn't? What is the difference between two people being in love and living together, and twp people being in love and living together but yet are married? Is kids the problem? Because many unmarried couples do have children and don't require being married to have one.
Is it the aging of Peter Parker that is the problem that keeps the marriage off the table? If that is the case then why doesn't DC have those same issues with their characters?
Can we get your perspective as to why the "higher ups" feel so negatively towards the marriage, but yet seem to have no problem with things like bringing back clones,Ben Reilly,Gwen Stacy or any other plot device?"

Any insight into this would be very welcome...thank you.

i don't feel he's changing subject or deflecting; he's just choosing not to answer. and that's his right.

i'm currently attached to a major project that is catching a lot of heat from the online audience. and it's frustrating/amusing (depending on the mood i'm in that day) watching them come up with theories about a process they're not privy too. and it's really disappointing watching these theories spread on social media to the point where they become "facts" and will possibly snowball into backlash. it's actually trippy seeing how certain some people are that "x must have happened" and they were "thinking y" when i know for a fact that it didn't and they don't.

when people ascribe malicious or cynical intent to a team or individuals that i know worked sincerely and tirelessly to create something they believe in, it can be heart breaking.

and i really, really want to just blow those incorrect and frankly damaging "facts" out of the water, but i can't, because it's not my place to speak on behalf of others or for a studio or corporation.

i totally agree, i would love dan to supply more insight. bts is always fascinating, but i'm guessing there are simply professional limits to which he can do so. or maybe he just can't be bothered...who knows? at the end of the day, what do we need with those particular insights? are we assuming that as outsiders we can disseminate and analyse them better than someone who works for marvel? that we can find some flaw in the reasoning? we either trust dan's input or we don't.

[UnknownEntity]

Again, you could do a story that resolved OMD without restoring the marriage. You could give Spidey a victory over Mephisto. You could have MJ back in the book as a love interest w/o them being married. But you're not going to see the marriage back in the core continuity. I'm not saying this to be cruel or to belittle anyone's genuine love of that status quo. I'm saying this with complete honesty and frankness. This is what the situation is.

No offense but (well I can't really control how you'll take it) addressing or "resolving" One More Day's effects without reinstating the marriage would be a pointless gesture, because the very purpose of that storyline was to undo the marriage, that is what Mephisto took from them and demanded from them (because why wouldn't a devil want that). If that isn't restored than the story didn't accomplish anything, it didn't undo or resolved OMD because the very thing OMD was created to undo wasn't restored.

Why couldn't Marvel undo a truly BAD thing like all the convolution of the Clone Saga instead of a good thing like ASM Annual 21.

OMD made the twenty years of publication from 87 to 07 seem completely unimportant even if OMIT supposedly explains that those stories happened. But if those stories did happen and they went through all the nightmares of the 90's the same as they did when they were married then they still wouldn't have broken up, but they did, but that was all Mephisto's demonic reality alteration in-universe. Then there is the inconceivable act that Spider Man, Marvel's greatest and most morally sound superhero made an out of character Faustian pact with the devil which is atrocious, even if it was for Aunt May, hell Aunt May would've beat the crap out of Peter if she learned of this.

So um yeah, there's all that. Which brings me to the only thing worth asking at this point. Not when the marriage will come back (you've already said it won't), not when OMD will be resolved, but simply WHY? Why does Marvel want Spider Man like that? They already had their single Spider Man in the Ultimate comics which many still agree its the best and most definitive run of Spider Man ever. Is it because they can't ship him off to another love interest or create love triangles? Why is the question.

[Timmyb52]

i don't feel he's changing subject or deflecting; he's just choosing not to answer. and that's his right.

i'm currently attached to a major project that is catching a lot of heat from the online audience. and it's frustrating/amusing (depending on the mood i'm in that day) watching them come up with theories about a process they're not privy too. and it's really disappointing watching these theories spread on social media to the point where they become "facts" and will possibly snowball into backlash. it's actually trippy seeing how certain some people are that "x must have happened" and they were "thinking y" when i know for a fact that it didn't and they don't.

when people ascribe malicious or cynical intent to a team or individuals that i know worked sincerely and tirelessly to create something they believe in, it can be heart breaking.

and i really, really want to just blow those incorrect and frankly damaging "facts" out of the water, but i can't, because it's not my place to speak on behalf of others or for a studio or corporation.

i totally agree, i would love dan to supply more insight. bts is always fascinating, but i'm guessing there are simply professional limits to which he can do so. or maybe he just can't be bothered...who knows? at the end of the day, what do we need with those particular insights? are we assuming that as outsiders we can disseminate and analyse them better than someone who works for marvel? that we can find some flaw in the reasoning? we either trust dan's input or we don't.

Boots,
Your reasons are sound...however,OMD is now 10 years old,the marriage is now a thing of the past...why can't he talk about the reasons why Marvel is so against it and continue to be so after seeing DC openly embracing it,accepting it and using it to such success? The only reason I can think of for why Slott refuses to answer these questions is because Marvel is currently making moves to address it in some manner. There is no reason other than that why Mr.Slott should not be able to give us some insight into all of this.These are easy and straight forward questions that should have a logical and simple answer...but yet they go unanswered.Why?

[boots]

Boots,
Your reasons are sound...however,OMD is now 10 years old,the marriage is now a thing of the past...why can't he talk about the reasons why Marvel is so against it and continue to be so after seeing DC openly embracing it,accepting it and using it to such success? The only reason I can think of for why Slott refuses to answer these questions is because Marvel is currently making moves to address it in some manner. There is no reason other than that why Mr.Slott should not be able to give us some insight into all of this.These are easy and straight forward questions that should have a logical and simple answer...but yet they go unanswered.Why?

it might be about the sensitivity of a current or proposed story, true.

but it could just be about not talking about things that aren't anyone else's business. i can't think of too many companies that like to disclose full details of their processes. not automotive or tech or entertainment. even when i worked in retail, there were things the owners preferred not to discuss outside the business employees. and that's fair

[Timmyb52]

Mr.Slott,
you have also used and borrowed the Biblical motiff of death and resurrection many times throughout your 10 year run...most recently in The Clone Conspiracy.
Is not death and resurrection a repeating motiff used throughout the comic medium?
And does not this motiff have its origins dating back to the earliest of man's recorded time...most famously with the story of Jesus?
Is not Doc Ock in your current run a prime example of that, and of the messianic figure returned from death?

[boots]

Mr.Slott,
you have also used and borrowed the Biblical motiff of death and resurrection many times throughout your 10 year run...most recently in The Clone Conspiracy.
Is not death and resurrection a repeating motiff used throughout the comic medium?
And does not this motiff have its origins dating back to the earliest of man's recorded time...most famously with the story of Jesus?
Is not Doc Ock in your current run a prime example of that, and of the messianic figure returned from death?

to be fair, ressurection figures in religion predate the bible and are probably what the biblical stories drew influence from.

[Timmyb52]

it might be about the sensitivity of a current or proposed story, true.

but it could just be about not talking about things that aren't anyone else's business. i can't think of too many companies that like to disclose full details of their processes. not automotive or tech or entertainment. even when i worked in retail, there were things the owners preferred not to discuss outside the business employees. and that's fair

We are talking about a plot device...not about the inner workings of Marvels operations.
DC is using the real life concept of marriage with no problem and benefiting from it tremendously...the fans love seeing a married Superman with a wife and child.
Why can Peter be portrayed being married with a child in Renew Your Vows by Marvel with no problems or issues, but not the 616? This is a double standard that makes little sense at all.
What's so hard, or difficult with having a married Peter Parker in the 616?
What are these "insurmountable obstacles" that Mr.Slott and Marvel refuse to inform us of?
Could it be there are no "insurmountable obstacles" and its merely founded on a bias/hatred of the marriage itself by some within Marvel?
If not this, then what is it? Can't we,the fans, for once and for all just get a simple answer to a simple question instead of just being told "it will never "happen"?

[Timmyb52]

I stated that..."does not this motiff have its origins dating back to the earliest of man's recorded time" already.
If the Bible itself shows that it used this motiff from earlier traditions,sources and stories...what makes it so sacred that modern day writers are "banned" from taking inspiration from the Bible itself?
Many of the Bibles stories and traditions are taken from earlier Egyptian ones...they are not original to the Jewish culture itself.
Slott is merely resorting to semantics and not logic in his reply...and I do not say that in a mean or derogatory manner.

[Lee]

Several high ranking Marvel Comics employees (such as Joe Quesada and Tom Brevoort) have explained the reasoning for un-marrying Spider-Man over the years. If you want that information, it's out there.

But, to be blunt, is there any answer that would satisfy you?

It seems like no matter what answer is given a vocal part of the fan base will try to argue against it or find a logical flaw, as if Marvel would then have to concede defeat and re-marry Spider-Man.

[boots]

We are talking about a plot device...not about the inner workings of Marvels operations.

but...we are? in almost every post he's made on this thread, dan has pleaded a case that the obstacles to reinstating the marriage are structural, systemic, hierarchical. literally 10 posts before yours, he stressed those points again.

If not this, then what is it? Can't we,the fans, for once and for all just get a simple answer to a simple question instead of just being told "it will never "happen"?

evidently, not to your satisfaction. fans can ask all the questions they like, but nobody is obligated to answer to their satisfaction.

[boots]

I stated that..."does not this motiff have its origins dating back to the earliest of man's recorded time" already.

yes, but you qualified that sentence with "most famously with the story of Jesus?" as an example of earliest 'recorded time'. there is a good 30, 000 years of story telling b.c

what makes it so sacred that modern day writers are "banned" from taking inspiration from the Bible itself?

i missed the part where dan said it had been banned or implied something to that effect. can you please quote it to save me a bit of time searching the thread?

[UnknownEntity]

We are talking about a plot device...not about the inner workings of Marvels operations.
DC is using the real life concept of marriage with no problem and benefiting from it tremendously...the fans love seeing a married Superman with a wife and child.
Why can Peter be portrayed being married with a child in Renew Your Vows by Marvel with no problems or issues, but not the 616? This is a double standard that makes little sense at all.
What's so hard, or difficult with having a married Peter Parker in the 616?
What are these "insurmountable obstacles" that Mr.Slott and Marvel refuse to inform us of?
Could it be there are no "insurmountable obstacles" and its merely founded on a bias/hatred of the marriage itself by some within Marvel?
If not this, then what is it? Can't we,the fans, for once and for all just get a simple answer to a simple question instead of just being told "it will never "happen"?

Yup, pretty much this.

Although regardless of the answer whether its justified or not (there's no excuse for the satanic atrocity that is OMD) I'll still want the marriage back because there was no real reason why they needed to split up. Literally, it was because the heads of Marvel said so because they didn't like it or something. There was no reason at all to do it.

[boots]

There was no reason at all to do it.

i actually heard it was a coin toss.

[squirecam]

^ Another example of a rather epic way of erasing OMD.

There a lots of ways of undoing it.

Personally, I would like to see how JMS would come back and undo it.

I'd rather Dan just use my idea. Which I totally release all my rights to if that actually resolves the OMD issue once and for all.

[UnknownEntity]

Several high ranking Marvel Comics employees (such as Joe Quesada and Tom Brevoort) have explained the reasoning for un-marrying Spider-Man over the years. If you want that information, it's out there.

But, to be blunt, is there any answer that would satisfy you?

It seems like no matter what answer is given a vocal part of the fan base will try to argue against it or find a logical flaw, as if Marvel would then have to concede defeat and re-marry Spider-Man.

Probably not. The marriage did NOT affect sales negatively, it did NOT affect the brand in a negative fashion, it did NOT limit or make Spider Man less relatable or viable. Viability is dependent upon the prowess of the writer. Tom Brevoort called One More Day medicine even if its not good for you and that is pure bull because OMD is nothing short of poison. Quesada simply stated that he thought Peter remaining single is an intrinsic part of the character and that is also bull. Neither of those answers are business or brand based decisions, they were purely because of what they wanted it to be, like us right now. Concurrent to the JMS run of Spider Man was the Ultimate Spider Man which featured their ideal Spider Man being still a teenager and was even more successful in its beginnings than the main ASM book. Peter Parker is a timeless character, all comic book characters are, but he's not meant to remain perpetual in a status quo that brings him back to square one or resets him, otherwise Stan Lee the creator of Spider Man wouldn't have aged him past his high school years. He's a progressive character. OMD literally just went back to square one and undid twenty years of character development.