• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Spider-Man: One More Day, One Moment in Time and Joe Q

Ok - the final part has also been posted - CUP O'M.I.T.: The Final Chapter

From the Interview

Kiel Phegley: One more question about OMIT, does this now close the book on Peter and MJ?

Joe Quesada: No, absolutely not! What we have now is MJ back in the cast fulltime as a significant part of Peter’s world. To me that’s a good thing. And by the way, while there are no immediate plans, (I mean this is Peter Parker, Spider-Man we’re talking about) no one’s life takes more twists and turns than Peter’s.

Who says that perhaps one day Peter and MJ may not find themselves trying it again?

I think Marvel is floating a trial balloon there. Call me a hopeless romantic or what-not, but there's something appealing about Peter Parker and MJ getting back together all over again - it's just meant to be.
 
Okay, just a sidebar here...

And when it comes to wiping memories, who has more experience than Strange, Reed and Tony? Strange had his identity revealed once and magically wiped peoples minds as did Tony.

Umm... Doctor Strange's real name is... Doctor Stephen Strange. And he doesn't wear a mask. How can he even have a secret identity?
 
Yeah Marvel has given hints over the year that eventually Peter and Mary Jane will be reunited somehow which begs the obvious question WHY BOTHER TO DO THIS IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!???
 
Well in one of the first issues of BND when Paper Doll is going after MJ's new actor boyfriend, she talks to Spidey on the intercom and says she's someone who knew him in another life or something like that.
 
MJ has retained knowledge of Peter's identity since Peter was selfish and brought her into the mystical bubble with him when Strange was performing the incantation to wipe people's memories. Again the FULL extent of Mephisto's deal is hidden from the Parker's. They only remember Strange's memory wipe or at least Peter does, they have no clue that their marriage was negated. This is why most fans are anticipating/dreading Mephisto's upcoming appearance to see what happens and what he does.
 
They should do a story about how Mephisto takes over Marvel 616 Earth because of this damned "deal" and have the whole weight of literally the end of the world come down on Peter's neck because of it such that he risks his life to go back in time and fix it so the deal never happened.

Either that or they should do a story where one of the villains gets in a lucky shot and kills Peter and we see Mephisto claim his soul for eternal torment.

Then do a reboot of Spider-Man entirely.
 
Yeah Marvel has given hints over the year that eventually Peter and Mary Jane will be reunited somehow which begs the obvious question WHY BOTHER TO DO THIS IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!???

Because when they initially did it, they probably did mean it to be permanent. But creators change their plans all the time, particularly if something they do is badly received.

Besides, hinting at something doesn't necessarily mean that there's a solid plan to do it. It just means that series storytellers try to keep their options open. You don't know for sure what's going to work, so when you make a big change, you give yourself a back door, a way to undo it if it doesn't work out -- or if some future creator wants to reverse it, which is pretty much inevitable if the series runs long enough. There's usually some wiggle room left in, even if there's no specific intention to use it.
 
Actually lots of fans were thinking that Mephisto was involved or responsible for "Dark Reign" but that was never the case.
 
^I was a fan of that theory. That Norman had made the original deal with Mephisto in order to destroy everyone and everything Peter cared for, in both his personal and super-hero lives.
 
^ I subscribed to this theory as well, thought it was pretty sound, too bad it didn't happen. I am really interested in reading the Osborn prison book that is coming out later this winter though, the interview with the writer made it sound cool.

@Christopher..."They" is Joe Q let's not kid ourselves here, this was his mandate from the start. I seriously doubt that he even considered altering or having this just be a storyline for a temporary basis of time,the way he's talked about it and rammed it down fans throats for the past three years would indicate this. As I mentioned before in this thread this is his mark and legacy on the character...unraveling it makes it look like a joke in the first place. Oh and dude this is plain speculation on my part based on what I've read, we'll see in the next year or so. They're planning some interesting things as "BND" concludes (note how I didn't say ends) and "The Big Time (which is phase two of the story) begins in the next couple of months.
 
@Christopher..."They" is Joe Q let's not kid ourselves here, this was his mandate from the start. I seriously doubt that he even considered altering or having this just be a storyline for a temporary basis of time,the way he's talked about it and rammed it down fans throats for the past three years would indicate this.

Of course you're right about that, but my point is that, in something like ongoing series fiction, no creator can ever be absolutely certain that his or her plans won't have to be reversed sometime in the future. So even if your intention is to make a new change permanent, it's just common sense to have a backup plan in case things don't go the way you intend. Think of it like the lifeboats on a ship or the airbags on a car. You don't want to use them, you'll hopefully never have to use them, but it's still common sense to include them just in case. So there's no conflict between intending a story change to be permanent and including a vague possibility that it could be reversed. In something as open-ended and unpredictable as serial fiction, it's always a good idea to keep your options open.

On the other hand, just because Quesada is hinting now that there may be a chance of Peter and MJ getting married again, that doesn't necessarily mean he had any such intention in mind when OMD came out. If anything, it sounds to me like he's walking back some of his original intentions in response to audience dissatisfaction. People hated the deal with the devil, so he created a new story that said, "Hey, guess what, Peter didn't make a deal with the devil after all." A lot of people also reacted badly to breaking up the marriage, so now he's appeasing them by hinting that the marriage could possibly come back. Maybe he didn't have any such back doors or retcons in mind when he started this process, but he's working them in now.


As I mentioned before in this thread this is his mark and legacy on the character...unraveling it makes it look like a joke in the first place.

To me, it simply makes it look like it didn't work out as he'd hoped and he's having second thoughts. That's hardly the first time in Spidey history that a bad idea has been retconned. In the Clone Saga, Ben Reilly was revealed to be the real Peter Parker, and that was supposed to be a permanent change, but it was so poorly received that it was retconned away and the original Peter was confirmed to have been the real one. The John Byrne reboot of Spidey's origins was so badly received that it was abandoned without any explanation for the reversal; it was just treated as though it had never happened. This is something that happens a lot in comics -- new things get tried, they're badly received, and so they get retconned away. There's nothing new or unique about what seems to be happening here.
 
The way Joe talks about it would seem like it's the most brilliant idea in the history of comics!! ;) I agree with most of your post (this is becoming a scary trend Christopher, me agreeing with you).
 
Joey is so frakking arrogant I can't beleive that this is the result of anything but a quiet "fix this" from the Disney front office.
 
The way Joe talks about it would seem like it's the most brilliant idea in the history of comics!! ;)

Well, what do you expect? His job is to sell his product and hopefully make a profit for his company. Naturally he's going to put a positive spin on it; anyone in the same position would do so. You don't come out and say, "Yeah, that didn't work out too well" if there's still a chance it can earn money. For that, you wait until later when the company's bottom line can't be negatively affected by the bad publicity anymore.
 
I think Marvel is floating a trial balloon there. Call me a hopeless romantic or what-not, but there's something appealing about Peter Parker and MJ getting back together all over again - it's just meant to be.

I recall a theory floating around in the aftermath of OMD and the Paper Doll arc, that Marvel had left the door open to a return to the marriage (in the whisper), which looks closed now; but the other component if the theory was that even if the marriage returned, the new story of overcoming even Satanic deals would over-write the original rushed marriage story. It would confirm the "meant to be" aspects of Peter/MJ. In other words, if OMD didn't take with the fans, at the very least a story perceived as flawed would be replaced with something mythic.
 
^ I don't know why but the cat in your icon scares me. What's it from, Derishton?

Does anyone know if MJ still knows about the deal, as was hinted at early on in this story?

Per my understanding (and this has been somewhat confusing) nobody knows about the deal (except possibly for Mephisto - who's set to make an appearance in the spider-man books within the next month or so) including Peter and MJ. To them, it just "appears" like a different set of circumstances where they never married *took place*.


On another topic -

A lot of fans ask the question why didn't they just choose to have Peter and MJ divorce each other. I personally thought that was deliberate as they might not want a divorced hero. It makes it look somewhat worse for Peter to be playing the field with a divorced background as opposed to a never-been-married background. And also, I don't think they were prepared to make their A-lister hero a divorced person. Nobody really likes the Hank Pym storylines tho' it gives Marvel a hat to hang on about dealing with divorce and wife-beating and so on within the purview of their overall comics.

But here's the thing - will Disney be ok with having their A-list hero (Spidey) in a live-in non-wedded relationship since the 80s or something? Cos per my understanding that's what happened as per OMIT's explanation of how the OMD-effect was done in the past.

I am not saying personally that either a divorce or even a live-in relationship are necessarily bad or taboo things. I am just asking aloud if Marvel and Disney would think it so.
 
^ I don't know why but the cat in your icon scares me. What's it from, Derishton?

That's John Tenniel's original illustration of the Cheshire Cat from Alice's Adventures in Wonderland.



A lot of fans ask the question why didn't they just choose to have Peter and MJ divorce each other. I personally thought that was deliberate as they might not want a divorced hero.

That's somewhat understandable by itself. But what boggles the mind is the idea that getting divorced is unacceptable for a hero but making a deal with the Devil is okay.
 
A lot of fans ask the question why didn't they just choose to have Peter and MJ divorce each other. I personally thought that was deliberate as they might not want a divorced hero.

That's somewhat understandable by itself. But what boggles the mind is the idea that getting divorced is unacceptable for a hero but making a deal with the Devil is okay.
How is the difference hard to understand? I can't even fathom why they would think divorce is 'unacceptable' but Mephisto, yeah that is a 'safe' out.

Divorce is acceptable on several levels for most all people. Whether it be safety concerns, trust issues or even moral ones for the religous inclined. Not to mention its an earthly decision.

Making a deal with the devil, a devil is seen by, again, nearly everyone as something 'dirty', foolish and not to mention EVIL.

Stigma vs No Stigma....how is the difference not understood?
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top