View Poll Results: 10 Years Later, was the deal with Mephisto worth it?

Voters
171. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    35 20.47%
  • No

    136 79.53%
Page 47 of 47 FirstFirst ... 374344454647
Results 691 to 705 of 705
  1. #691
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    75

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevinroc View Post
    The idea was Aunt May was a senile old fool. She was out of touch with the real world. Her idea that the perfect girl for Peter was this party girl was meant to play into that.
    ok
    thanks for explaining

    but I didn't get the impression that Mary Jane was just a party girl

    her personality seemed extraverted,energetic,outgoing,fiery,hip,liberal,c onfident,
    unconventional,independent,charismatic,ambitious,f riendly,and nice


    what happened was a bit ironic

    I think it was cool how Stan made it that Mary Jane and Gwen's character development was like spontaneous and uncontrolled and that Mary Jane just won over the fans
    and got Gwen killed ...hahahaha
    Last edited by Starrius; Today at 10:05 AM.

  2. #692
    Mighty Member WebLurker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    1,347

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Mets View Post
    How could a crappy childhood be an essential part of Mary Jane's character if it wasn't referenced at all in the stories in which she became popular?
    Didn't they start building that up around the time that the character was becoming a mainstay? Also, I'd point out that it's a common characterization point whenever the character gets adapted into other media. Even the Raimi movies and Ultimate comics (which modified her from the party girl who bottled her emotions to a more open girl next door) made that an important piece of her backstory that set up more than a few stories.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Mets View Post
    It also hasn't been referenced in some of her best stories. Kraven's Last Hunt wouldn't have to change a panel if MJ had a happy childhood.
    I don't think a key piece of characterization needs to be present in every single story. For example, not every story brings up the events of Spidey's origin story, despite those being important to his character.

    Also, for what's its worth, that Spider Slayer story that was running a few months prior (where Peter and MJ get engaged) did deal with her messy relationship with her family (order was, Spider Slayer story, wedding story, then Kraven). So, it wasn't like it was forgotten.

  3. #693
    Mighty Member Tuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,853

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Mets View Post
    The surface details are what made the character stand out in the first place.
    That would apply to Spider-Gwen's costume.

    But it says nothing about the character.

  4. #694
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    405

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Mets View Post
    The surface details are what made the character stand out in the first place.
    Mary Jane originally stood out because she was a fun, vibrant woman; a rarity for silver age female characters. That being said, she initially had little depth and we knew nothing about her personally. Her broken family background really served to flesh out her character and actually give her depth. I really don't see how something like that is a bad thing. You would prefer a shallow party girl who wants nothing but fun in her life? Her character would have worn thin pretty quickly if those were her only traits. By expanding her backstory, writers like Gerry Conway, Marv Wolfman and Tom DeFalco were able to transform Mary Jane from merely being a "fun" character to an interesting one. I guarantee that she would not have become the supporting giant she is today without that added backstory. Let's not forget that there was a period where Mary Jane was completely absent from the titles for about four years in the late 70s to early 80s.
    Last edited by Masked Guy; Today at 11:53 AM.

  5. #695
    HAIL SUMMERS dragonmp93's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    13,302

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lee View Post
    I can see why people would like it as its own thing, but the Mary Jane in Ultimate Spider-Man is so far removed from the original Mary Jane. They only really kept the name and the hair colour.
    Well, Gwen Stacy originally had more with common with Emma Frost than with how she has been portrayed in all the adaptations.
    You know, it's funny that DisMarvel keeps proving that "CYCLOPS WAS RIGHT"; even when he is dead.

  6. #696
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    256

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Starrius View Post
    speaking of characteristics


    Stan Lee cracked me up.

    in this youtube video
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUqRdAZED9Y

    He is talking about the creation of Mary Jane Watson and Gwen Stacy.

    Stan tells

    He and other writers created a girl, Gwen Stacy who Stan thought will eventually become the future wife of Peter Parker/Spider-Man.

    Just for fun, they introduced another Mary Jane Watson

    Even though they were fictitious girls,

    once they started writing them and their dialog,

    Mary Jane suddenly had all the personality and Gwen was just a nice girl.

    Mary Jane was the one with the fiery personality and she was hip and everything, and they couldn't control that.

    They couldn't make Gwen exciting and personable as Mary Jane even though they tried.

    It was like they were living creatures and they couldn't control them.

    Maybe he shouldn't told that because maybe that showed they were lousy writers and artists.

    After they killed off Gwen Stacy's father, Captain Stacy, Stan came back from a 2 week London trip and found out that Stan's fellow writer Jerry Conway killed off Gwen Stacy.

    Stan Lee pointed out something that he wished had been done in the Spider-Man movies that had Mary Jane but wasn't done:

    Peter Parker's Aunt May always wanted Peter to meet a girl next door that was a very nice girl,

    Most boys would run a mile if their mothers tell them that they want them to meet a nice girl.

    Most teenage boys don't want to meet a nice girl

    They want to meet a sexy, fun girl.

    Peter kept avoiding.

    He tried to do everything that he could do avoid meeting Mary Jane until May made him stay when she knew that Mary Jane was coming.
    It's the natural red hair ...

    It's the ghost chile of follicular expression

  7. #697
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    256

    Default

    Maybe it's just me - but It always seemed like Gwen was modeled after Stan Lee's experiences - and old fashioned (even by standards of the day).

    Maybe part of the lack of develooment is it's a charector they weren't really able to play with and develop the way they would want, so MJ benefited from a younger perspective in a changing world...and Gwen got tiptoed around.

    A friend of mine has two kids - the older has always been a bit Mephisto like ... Especially with the other kids.... But his mom will eat your face off if you mention it. The other kid started as kind of sweet - but ha benefitted from the extra attention and protection... And overtime, is just a more rounded, more popular kid...

    No one is going to chuck the other one off a bridge when mom isn't looking - but you'd have to be blind to miss what's happening over the last few years.

  8. #698

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WebLurker View Post
    Didn't they start building that up around the time that the character was becoming a mainstay? Also, I'd point out that it's a common characterization point whenever the character gets adapted into other media. Even the Raimi movies and Ultimate comics (which modified her from the party girl who bottled her emotions to a more open girl next door) made that an important piece of her backstory that set up more than a few stories.



    I don't think a key piece of characterization needs to be present in every single story. For example, not every story brings up the events of Spidey's origin story, despite those being important to his character.

    Also, for what's its worth, that Spider Slayer story that was running a few months prior (where Peter and MJ get engaged) did deal with her messy relationship with her family (order was, Spider Slayer story, wedding story, then Kraven). So, it wasn't like it was forgotten.
    That's a fair point on the stuff that is adapted, although there were plenty of complaints about Dunst being unable to capture MJ's personality.

    I'm not saying that MJ's backstory was forgotten by the writers. I just don't think it affected the character's popularity.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tuck View Post
    That would apply to Spider-Gwen's costume.

    But it says nothing about the character.
    That's a literal take on surface details.

    Spider-Gwen's first issue did reveal stuff about her personality, so her popularity is due to more than just a cool costume.
    Sincerely,
    Thomas Mets

  9. #699
    Mighty Member Tuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,853

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Mets View Post
    That's a literal take on surface details.
    The whole point of the metaphorical use is to equate them.

  10. #700
    Mighty Member phantom1592's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,640

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Starrius View Post
    It was like they were living creatures and they couldn't control them.

    Maybe he shouldn't told that because maybe that showed they were lousy writers and artists.
    I have seen that idea set forth from DOZENS of writers in the past. Not just comics but novels, screenplays etc. That's actually a mark of GOOD writer not a lousy one. It's why I roll my eyes whenever anyone's big argument is 'they're fictional characters... they do whatever the writer wants them to do'. Real writers NEVER say that. Once they start writing, the story takes a life of it's own. Writers have confided that the story takes twist and turns that they never expected when they sat down, and some lines of dialogue get switched and changed because it's not something that character would say... or HOW they would say it...

    This is very common.

  11. #701
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    256

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phantom1592 View Post
    I have seen that idea set forth from DOZENS of writers in the past. Not just comics but novels, screenplays etc. That's actually a mark of GOOD writer not a lousy one. It's why I roll my eyes whenever anyone's big argument is 'they're fictional characters... they do whatever the writer wants them to do'. Real writers NEVER say that. Once they start writing, the story takes a life of it's own. Writers have confided that the story takes twist and turns that they never expected when they sat down, and some lines of dialogue get switched and changed because it's not something that character would say... or HOW they would say it...

    This is very common.
    ^^ This. So very true - it's surreal to see someone look exausted from arguing with a work of fiction and losing.

    Of coarse, if your editor summons Satan... All bets are off.

  12. #702
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    75

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phantom1592 View Post
    I have seen that idea set forth from DOZENS of writers in the past. Not just comics but novels, screenplays etc. That's actually a mark of GOOD writer not a lousy one. It's why I roll my eyes whenever anyone's big argument is 'they're fictional characters... they do whatever the writer wants them to do'. Real writers NEVER say that. Once they start writing, the story takes a life of it's own. Writers have confided that the story takes twist and turns that they never expected when they sat down, and some lines of dialogue get switched and changed because it's not something that character would say... or HOW they would say it...

    This is very common.
    Stan Lee said that as a joke which got people laughing

  13. #703
    Mighty Member phantom1592's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,640

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Starrius View Post
    Stan Lee said that as a joke which got people laughing
    Just because it's funny doesn't make it less true. As I 've said, it's a common statement about characters and books taking on lives of their own. Just look at how many threads here exist because some writer wrote something that was totally out of character and the chaos that ensued.

    It's part of the magic of being a writer.

  14. #704
    Fantastic Member Timmyb52's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    464

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Mets View Post
    How could a crappy childhood be an essential part of Mary Jane's character if it wasn't referenced at all in the stories in which she became popular? It also hasn't been referenced in some of her best stories. Kraven's Last Hunt wouldn't have to change a panel if MJ had a happy childhood.
    How could OMD and OMIT be an essential part of Spiderman and MJ's history if it wasn't referenced at all in the stories in which he and MJ became popular? It also hasn't been referenced in some of their best stories. You see Mets this is why a lot of people hate retcons...because they change what has been established before in the stories and makes a mess of continuity. I can't see how you can be fine with something like OMD and OMIT but yet have such a serious issue with Parallel Lives and the stories leading up to the marriage in regards to MJ's character. After all didn't OMD and OMIT also have Peter and MJ {along with everybody else} acting OOC just so Quesada and Marvel could undo established continuity up to that point? It's fine to totally undo established continuity but yet not add some unknown details to MJ's history? Isn't that a double-standard?

  15. #705
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    75

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phantom1592 View Post
    Just because it's funny doesn't make it less true. As I 've said, it's a common statement about characters and books taking on lives of their own. Just look at how many threads here exist because some writer wrote something that was totally out of character and the chaos that ensued.

    It's part of the magic of being a writer.
    sighs

    I meant that Stan Lee joked about maybe he shouldn't told that because maybe that showed they were lousy writers and artists.

    I agree with you.

Posting Permissions

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