Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456
Results 76 to 88 of 88
  1. #76
    Astonishing Member Celgress's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Miles To Go View Post
    What were your thoughts on the Joyce Delaney clone? Missed opportunity?
    No, I think it would have been too soon for another permanent Gwen (for lack of a better term as this would not be a true return) or a Gwen replacement. Such a character at that point would have simply cheapened the tragic death of the original. Also, any relationship with Peter would have been seen as a retread by fans.

    On a related note. One idea I've always been fascinated by is what if Ben Rielly (before all his psychological trauma) and one of the Gwen clones (powers or no powers) had been given a chance at a life together?
    Last edited by Celgress; 06-14-2018 at 08:24 PM.
    "You'll never learn to fly now 'til you're standing at the cliff."

  2. #77
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    71

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ursalink View Post
    Recent info from "Spectacular Spider-Man #305" could have give us a hint about Spidergeddon's nature. It could be about Norman Osborn accessing time traveling technology to finally destroy Spider-Man. That surely can't be good. So, in case this theory is right, what kind of consequences do you think it will have? As far as I see, I believe several "wrong things" in Spider-Man's history could be "altered" or changed, similar to what happened with OMD, but in a better way. Personally these are the changes in Spider-Man's history that I would like to see:

    + Spider-Marriage with MJ restored. Potencially, giving us something similar to Renew Your Vows. (There's somekind of connection, as Peter, MJ and the Regent had a mysterious Deja Vu in their last battle).
    I really REALLY wish people would MOVE ON ABOUT THIS!!! The Spider-marriage is NOT coming back anytime soon. I've accepted it, and the rest of the fans need to do so too.

  3. #78
    Astonishing Member WebLurker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    4,132

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brer rabbit View Post
    I really REALLY wish people would MOVE ON ABOUT THIS!!! The Spider-marriage is NOT coming back anytime soon. I've accepted it, and the rest of the fans need to do so too.
    Why? I've got nothing to loose hanging on and accepting it nets me nothing. It's a bad bargain.
    Doctor Strange: "You are the right person to replace Logan."
    X-23: "I know there are people who disapprove... Guys on the Internet mainly."
    (All-New Wolverine #4)

  4. #79
    Incredible Member AngelJD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Brooklyn, New York
    Posts
    639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Celgress View Post
    *Raises Hand Enthusiastically* I would, well if she has spider powers and all of original Gwen's memories but with an improved outlook on life due to her experiences as a metahuman clone. Granted I am an ardent PeterxGwen shipper and an even more ardent Spider-ManxSpider-Gwen shipper (the concept not the characters because of the big age gap).
    I would accept her as well. She is a 'Gwen Stacy' may she be or not be a 'true' resurrection of 616 version 1 Gwen Stacy. If she isn't that still doesn't mean she can't be a Gwen Stacy even if a alternate born on a world where another version first existed. A alternate Gwen Stacy in the same vein as Gwen Stacy of 65, 617, Spectacular Spider-man animated series version, and every other Gwen Stacy versions we grown to know in some way and bond with possible.

    The matter if CC Gwen Stacy is a 'resurrected 'versions 1' 616 Gwen Stacy' or basically a 616 Gwen Stacy alternate/version 2 and thus her own independent character from version 1 is inconsequential for me. I'm a 'Gwen Stacy' fan. HOWEVER let me be clear that means that I'm a HUGE fan of MAJORITY of the Multiverse 'Gwen Stacys' that has been presented and also hopeful and interested in any future potentials versions to be made. That doesn't mean I'm a 616 version 1 Gwen Stacy fan (I'm neutral thus far about her/that version).

    I'm a fan of Gwen Stacy:
    65, 617, Spectacular Spider-man animated series verison, the Spectacular Spider-man Gwen we had seen in the latest two issues, the Dove voiced Gwen Stacy/Spider-woman, Emma Stone version, Age of Apocalypse version (right hand woman to Donald Blake (that many might also know as THOR) and a human resistance leader that was a huge threat to one of the houseman and knocked Victor Doom out and later dated Quicksilver overcoming her own personal issues with Mutants thanks to Apocalypse killing Peter and many that she loved), 1610 Gwen, 1610 clone Gwen that lived and was treated to exist and matter and thus earned a fanbase, and many more I'm sure.

    I really like CC Gwen and felt that she could of been fun and interesting (I have a few ideas about her and hopes that probably would not of happened but still). Wished she had a true chance to interact with 65 Gwen and much more.

  5. #80

  6. #81
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    5,978

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brer rabbit View Post
    I really REALLY wish people would MOVE ON ABOUT THIS!!! The Spider-marriage is NOT coming back anytime soon.
    ROFL, it never left if you check everywhere else.

    I've accepted it, and the rest of the fans need to do so too.
    Given all the OMD callbacks and other things lately, it's not like Marvel WANT us to forget or move on anytime soon.

  7. #82
    Mighty Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,215

    Default

    Is anyone else interested in the possibility of another Spider-Man from one of the adaptations showing up as part of this event?

    Edge of the Spider-Verse did have 60's cartoon Spider-Man and Miles Morales from the Ultimate cartoon, but apart from that, we haven't seen any other such Spider-Men.

    I read somewhere that 90's cartoon Spider-Man was technically part of Spider-Verse, but I didn't spot anyone like him there, so it might have been a blink and you miss it cameo at most.

    I'd certainly love to see 90's animated Spider-Man. Or Spider-Man from the 80's 'Amazing Friends' era (maybe accompanied by Iceman and Firestar?). Since Sony and Marvel are a bit friendlier these days and the rights issues are sorted out, Maguire and/or Garfield's Spider-Man wouldn't be a bad idea either (apparently, Slott wanted to include them in Spider-Verse but couldn't back then).

    To me, these Spider-Men are particularly interesting because they are 'canonical' and 'mainstream' Spider-Men in their own right - adaptations rather than obvious alternate reality versions. And it'd be interesting to see 616 Pete interact with counterparts who are so much like him, and yet different in both subtle and crucial ways.

    Maguire Peter might, for instance, be shocked to learn that 616 Peter considered Gwen Stacy to be one of the great loves of his life. He might have a much more sanguine attitude towards Spider-Gwen. 90's Spider-Man might be shocked that 616 Peter split up with MJ, considering that he's been desperately searching for his MJ in the Multiverse. Garfield's Peter and 616 Peter can bond over the loss of their respective Gwens, but 616 will be shocked to learn that Harry, not Norman, caused Gwen's death for his counterpart.

    And so on.

    Fascinating stuff!

  8. #83
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    31,017

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bat39 View Post
    Edge of the Spider-Verse did have 60's cartoon Spider-Man and Miles Morales from the Ultimate cartoon, but apart from that, we haven't seen any other such Spider-Men.
    They used Peter from the Ultimate cartoon, but Miles was the regular Miles from the comics.
    I read somewhere that 90's cartoon Spider-Man was technically part of Spider-Verse, but I didn't spot anyone like him there, so it might have been a blink and you miss it cameo at most.
    Slott claimed that the Spider-Man Unlimited's death counted for 90's Spidey with the assumption that the two shared the same continuity, although John Semper (the showrunner of the 90's cartoon) disagreed.
    I'd certainly love to see 90's animated Spider-Man. Or Spider-Man from the 80's 'Amazing Friends' era (maybe accompanied by Iceman and Firestar?). Since Sony and Marvel are a bit friendlier these days and the rights issues are sorted out, Maguire and/or Garfield's Spider-Man wouldn't be a bad idea either (apparently, Slott wanted to include them in Spider-Verse but couldn't back then).
    Morlun killed the Amazing Friends .

  9. #84
    Astonishing Member WebLurker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    4,132

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bat39 View Post
    I read somewhere that 90's cartoon Spider-Man was technically part of Spider-Verse, but I didn't spot anyone like him there, so it might have been a blink and you miss it cameo at most
    It could've been a sort-of technicality thing; in the short story that introduced the RVY Spider-Man, he and a black-suited Spidey are comparing notes and use descriptions to suggest that the Spideys from the Sam Raimi movies, the Mark Webb movies, the Electric Company TV show, and the Turn Off the Dark Broadway musical were all involved in Spider-Verse. They don't actually appear in the flesh (and one could make an argument that their involvement is not canonical to the source material in question), but one who wishes to imagine that they were there is free to.

    In regards to seeing Spideys from non-comic adaptations, I wonder if there's licensing issues involved that would prevent Marvel from using the Spideys from the Sony movies in their comics (not counting some "Word of God" that random background Spidey is "really" Tobey Maguire's Spidey or something like that).

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    Slott claimed that the Spider-Man Unlimited's death counted for 90's Spidey with the assumption that the two shared the same continuity, although John Semper (the showrunner of the 90's cartoon) disagreed.
    The two shows aren't in continuity. For starters, Venom and Carnage are different versions in each.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    Morlun killed the Amazing Friends .
    Didn't they backtrack and later claim that it was just an alternate universe version of the show (even assuming that the comics could be considered in continuity with the TV shows in the first place)?
    Last edited by WebLurker; 06-16-2018 at 09:18 AM.
    Doctor Strange: "You are the right person to replace Logan."
    X-23: "I know there are people who disapprove... Guys on the Internet mainly."
    (All-New Wolverine #4)

  10. #85
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    5,978

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    Slott claimed that the Spider-Man Unlimited's death counted for 90's Spidey with the assumption that the two shared the same continuity, although John Semper (the showrunner of the 90's cartoon) disagreed.
    Yeah, plus he wrote an audio drama which reunited 90s Spidey with MJ, there's a sample of it online somewhere, but it never was turned into a full production due to a kickstarter not making it's target goal (it was to have been a perk for people who donated)

    Morlun killed the Amazing Friends .
    There are several universes with Amazing Friends. Deadpool teamed up with one version of them shortly after Spider-Verse.

  11. #86
    Mighty Member Inversed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    1,170

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WebLurker View Post
    In regards to seeing Spideys from non-comic adaptations, I wonder if there's licensing issues involved that would prevent Marvel from using the Spideys from the Sony movies in their comics (not counting some "Word of God" that random background Spidey is "really" Tobey Maguire's Spidey or something like that).
    I believe Slott has mentioned before that is exactly what happened, he wasn't allowed to use the Maguire, Garfield, or Spectacular Spider-Men because they were owned by Sony, so they could only make references or allusions to them.
    Current Reading List: Spider-Gwen, Amazing Spider-Man, Avengers, Ms. Marvel, Spider-Man, Amazing Spider-Man: Renew Your Vows, Peter Parker: The Spectacular Spider-Man, Marvel Two-In-One, Tales Of Suspense, Champions, Despicable Deadpool

  12. #87
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    31,017

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WebLurker View Post
    The two shows aren't in continuity. For starters, Venom and Carnage are different versions in each.
    I never said I disagreed with Mr. Semper .
    Didn't they backtrack and later claim that it was just an alternate universe version of the show (even assuming that the comics could be considered in continuity with the TV shows in the first place)?
    I recall there was an issue that the universe numberings were off in certain cases (like the 90's cartoon and Unlimited both had separate and different designations in a Marvel Handbook).

  13. #88
    Astonishing Member WebLurker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    4,132

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Inversed View Post
    I believe Slott has mentioned before that is exactly what happened, he wasn't allowed to use the Maguire, Garfield, or Spectacular Spider-Men because they were owned by Sony, so they could only make references or allusions to them.
    Makes sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    I never said I disagreed with Mr. Semper .

    I recall there was an issue that the universe numberings were off in certain cases (like the 90's cartoon and Unlimited both had separate and different designations in a Marvel Handbook).

    Okay.
    Doctor Strange: "You are the right person to replace Logan."
    X-23: "I know there are people who disapprove... Guys on the Internet mainly."
    (All-New Wolverine #4)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •