Will Spider-Man ever recover from the stigma of "One More Day"/"Brand New Day"

[Spider-Man]

I've been reading the new Spider-Man arc "New Ways to Die" and it's great (there's a talkback for it here (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=215461) too). I've been reading a few reviews, but professional and fan reviews, and it seems like the majority of them say the storyline is great (and I agree) but they can't help but drag "One More Day" or "Brand New Day" into the review. I understand that it may be necessary for the review when talking about continuity but sometimes it's mentioned for no reason and the review just goes off base. Now I'm enjoying this new storyline and fans should really check it ou t. I can't wait to see how it ends, but I am curious about one thingg though. Given how rarely a day can't go by without "One More Day" or "Brand New Day" coming up at least in one way or another, will the Spider-Man book ever recover from the stigma of "One More Day"/"Brand New Day"? What do you think?

[Shawn Hopkins]

Maybe when the inevitably change it back. I love Dan Slott and the other creators working on the book now, but having Peter Parker make a deal with the devil was way too much for me, and I stopped buying new Spider-Man comics then and there.

[Spideyzilla]

Oh my... OMD AGAIN?! Absolutely no offense meant to you, but OMD was a long time ago. Spider-Man making a deal with Mephisto was not acceptable, but it happened. BND is awesome. I miss JMS, but I have really enjoyed the classic feel to Spidey. Simperin" Steve Wacker writes great letters pages (I was delighted to see them return) the SpideyBraintrust id doing great, but the best thing is the art. McNiven, Larroca, Jimenz, Bachalo, Martin, Romita, Kitson, need I go on? Spider-Man dosen't need to recover from OMD (which I won't deny was awful) He already has.

[Wonderwall]

I won't go so far as saying he's recovered from it completely, but it does seem kind of a non factor at this moment. It'll probably just be remembered and seen as poorly as The Clone Saga was.

[Peter Paltridge]

I won't go so far as saying he's recovered from it completely, but it does seem kind of a non factor at this moment. It'll probably just be remembered and seen as poorly as The Clone Saga was.
Clone Saga was reversed and has no bearing on anything that happened after it. With BND the situation's different.

[wonderfly]

Clone Saga was reversed and has no bearing on anything that happened after it. With BND the situation's different.

The initial premise of the Clone Saga, (that the Peter Parker in the comics since 1975-ish has been a clone) was indeed reversed...4 years later. That's how long it took for the Clone Saga to truly resolve itself. And it came at the cost of reintroducing Norman Osborn to the cast, (which has had it's benefits, at times, but is still harmful to the original "Death of Gwen Stacy" storyline).

But I digress...all's I'm saying is: if you're hoping for OMD/BND to be undone...just wait a few years. Comic storylines go in cycles. In the meantime, just enjoy stories with an unmarried Spider-Man.

[Ed Liu]

But I digress...all's I'm saying is: if you're hoping for OMD/BND to be undone...just wait a few years. Comic storylines go in cycles. In the meantime, just enjoy stories with an unmarried Spider-Man.

Oddly enough, Jen Contino had something to say about this at the PULSE (http://www.comicon.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=39;t=000383), and it seems that we had a lot of the same comics that influenced us:


We felt the stories were so important -- the characters and situations made such an impact on us. The stories mattered!

When Gwen Stacy was murdered, people weren't thinking, "She'll be back some day." When an insane Terra took her own life trying to kill the rest of the New Teen Titans, readers weren't believing, "This is just temporary." When you voted to kill Jason Todd, did you dream he'd return one day? These were terrible things that shook us to our core, and felt horrible. These were events that affected our "friends" and heroes. We mourned for those characters. We sadly watched others in their lives rebuild, and we cheered as they overcame these tragedies. Because we thought it meant something. Those were the comics that we can still read to this day and feel something inside. We read and reread those issues over and over again. The covers are about to fall off of them, and that's fine.

But what about now?

How did you feel when Captain America died? Did it shake you to the core, or did you just figure sooner or later Steve Rogers will return. What about the recent deaths of the New Gods or Martian Manhunter? Does it feel permanent, or just like a plot device that will play out later? What was the first comic book death that moved you, and, if it was one that was retconned back into existence, how did you feel afterwards?

I can remember when Storm lost her powers in Uncanny X-Men -- if Chris Claremont had intended to give them back to her, he sure was playing his cards close to the vest. It really does seem to me that the Marvel and DC Comics of the 80's really were playing around with fire and willing to really make changes to the accepted status quo that they played with for the long haul. Maybe it's just the benefit of years of hindsight, the wide-eyed naiveté that we have when we're younger, or the fact that the undos and resets in recent memory are coming closer and closer together, but it feels to me like Contino has a point -- the modern day stuff feels a lot more like a sales gimmick than, say, Walt Simonson turning Thor's world inside out, or Chris Claremont putting his merry mutants into a tree and throwing rocks at them.

Also relating to the above, the stigma attached to OMD isn't because the story was bad (although, from all accounts, it was). It's because it was so obvious that the reason why the story happened at all was because of editorial interference, and that wasn't the case (or at least it wasn't as obvious) in those comics that Contino and I grew up with. When Storm lost her powers, it sure didn't seem like a decision that came from Louise Jones (now Louise Simonson) or Jim Shooter, and Claremont ran with it for a good, long time. Shooter mandated the events of Secret Wars, but it still felt like the creators had room to take those things in other directions. Colossus broke up with Kitty Pryde over events in Secret Wars, and whether that was editorial or not, it felt like something Claremont adopted for his own. I have no idea whether Shooter mandated that Spidey's black suit would be a hostile alien symbiote, but that little bit of Secret Wars really took on a life of its own. I feel that a little bit with Captain America, but not with a lot of other events, really.

So, I don't think OMD is never going to get out from the stigma it's under, and that has nothing to do with the story and everything to do with how it happened in the first place. It's a matter of the public record now, as is the fact that every justification Joe Q. has ever come up with for it has proven to be crap. I'm sure the events of OMD will eventually be undone, but it's stigma is going to taint Spider-Man, at least a little bit, for as long as the book's fans remember it.

-- Ed

[Shawn Hopkins]

Oddly enough, Jen Contino had something to say about this at the PULSE (http://www.comicon.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=39;t=000383), and it seems that we had a lot of the same comics that influenced us:



I can remember when Storm lost her powers in Uncanny X-Men -- if Chris Claremont had intended to give them back to her, he sure was playing his cards close to the vest. It really does seem to me that the Marvel and DC Comics of the 80's really were playing around with fire and willing to really make changes to the accepted status quo that they played with for the long haul. Maybe it's just the benefit of years of hindsight, the wide-eyed naiveté that we have when we're younger, or the fact that the undos and resets in recent memory are coming closer and closer together, but it feels to me like Contino has a point -- the modern day stuff feels a lot more like a sales gimmick than, say, Walt Simonson turning Thor's world inside out, or Chris Claremont putting his merry mutants into a tree and throwing rocks at them.

Also relating to the above, the stigma attached to OMD isn't because the story was bad (although, from all accounts, it was). It's because it was so obvious that the reason why the story happened at all was because of editorial interference, and that wasn't the case (or at least it wasn't as obvious) in those comics that Contino and I grew up with. When Storm lost her powers, it sure didn't seem like a decision that came from Louise Jones (now Louise Simonson) or Jim Shooter, and Claremont ran with it for a good, long time. Shooter mandated the events of Secret Wars, but it still felt like the creators had room to take those things in other directions. Colossus broke up with Kitty Pryde over events in Secret Wars, and whether that was editorial or not, it felt like something Claremont adopted for his own. I have no idea whether Shooter mandated that Spidey's black suit would be a hostile alien symbiote, but that little bit of Secret Wars really took on a life of its own. I feel that a little bit with Captain America, but not with a lot of other events, really.

So, I don't think OMD is never going to get out from the stigma it's under, and that has nothing to do with the story and everything to do with how it happened in the first place. It's a matter of the public record now, as is the fact that every justification Joe Q. has ever come up with for it has proven to be crap. I'm sure the events of OMD will eventually be undone, but it's stigma is going to taint Spider-Man, at least a little bit, for as long as the book's fans remember it.

-- Ed

Really good points there, Ed. I actually remember Shooter giving an interview, I think it was in an issue of Comics Interview devoted to Secret War or Secret War II, in which he said he didn't mind readers getting up in arms or excited about changes to characters. That's because when the readers stop buying into and caring about the world of the characters and start thinking of them as just stories you've lost them. The obvious editorial meddling, gimmicky changes and looming reset buttons mean that for today's comic book readers there's no way of avoiding that realization, of seeing "the man behind the curtain," and I think comics have lost something for it.

[Antiyonder]

1. Spider-Man is my favorite character, but I don't want all of my purchases to be Spider-Man related. I like other titles in my collection, thus getting Amazing Spider-Man 3 times a month would be unproductive in that regard.

2. The biggest problem with Quesada's reasoning that I have is his assumption that the marriage was the source of the comics failing. The one thing he fails to factor is that with exception, the only places that comics are available are at comic stores and maybe a bookstore here or there.

2a. Free Comic Book Day should be implemented in other places (grocery stores, convenient stores, gas stations) as well as delivering a set in places that have a magazine rack for people to read at the Barbershop, doctor's office, dentist's office, eye doctor or even school libraries or classrooms.

2b. Let's face it, if there was a survey asking many adults here or in general where they picked up their first comic, I'm betting that the answer would be grocery store, convenient store, drug store or a gas station. Hence why getting more readers isn't as simple as changing story elements.

[Stu]

I wouldn't mind the reset as much if the new stories were actually any good. The deal with the devil and the fact that the continuity now makes no sense whatsoever (and BS like Harry still being alive and Quesada's illogical request to bring back Gwen Stacy, even though she died before Peter and MJ got married) and goes entirely against... every single bit of characterisation I've ever read about Spider-Man. Really, a butterfly effect would've been so much better for setting up the new premisis.

My main problems is that the new storylines have pretty much sucked. None of the writers (or editors, more likely) seem to understand Peter's character. Peter struggling to find his own apartment/work and to not suck at everything is fine when he's a 17 year old finding his way in the world and trying to fight crime at the same time but if you're still jobless, careerless, uneducated and mooching off your Aunt at 25, you need a slap. We've also had this 'Parker luck' shooved down our throats in ridicolous amount.

All the new villains absoloutly suck. The new supporting characters aren't remotely interesting. Hopefully the inclusion of Eddie Brock and The Green Goblin in this new arc will pick things up a bit.

The recent Mark Waid back up was good. I am looking forward to his arc.

[wonderfly]

I can remember when Storm lost her powers in Uncanny X-Men -- if Chris Claremont had intended to give them back to her, he sure was playing his cards close to the vest. It really does seem to me that the Marvel and DC Comics of the 80's really were playing around with fire and willing to really make changes to the accepted status quo that they played with for the long haul. Maybe it's just the benefit of years of hindsight, the wide-eyed naiveté that we have when we're younger, or the fact that the undos and resets in recent memory are coming closer and closer together, but it feels to me like Contino has a point -- the modern day stuff feels a lot more like a sales gimmick than, say, Walt Simonson turning Thor's world inside out, or Chris Claremont putting his merry mutants into a tree and throwing rocks at them.

Also relating to the above, the stigma attached to OMD isn't because the story was bad (although, from all accounts, it was). It's because it was so obvious that the reason why the story happened at all was because of editorial interference, and that wasn't the case (or at least it wasn't as obvious) in those comics that Contino and I grew up with. When Storm lost her powers, it sure didn't seem like a decision that came from Louise Jones (now Louise Simonson) or Jim Shooter, and Claremont ran with it for a good, long time. Shooter mandated the events of Secret Wars, but it still felt like the creators had room to take those things in other directions. Colossus broke up with Kitty Pryde over events in Secret Wars, and whether that was editorial or not, it felt like something Claremont adopted for his own. I have no idea whether Shooter mandated that Spidey's black suit would be a hostile alien symbiote, but that little bit of Secret Wars really took on a life of its own. I feel that a little bit with Captain America, but not with a lot of other events, really.

Wasn't Chris Claremont the one who killed off Jean Grey, only to turn around and bring her back to life years later?!? ;)


The deal with the devil and the fact that the continuity now makes no sense whatsoever (and BS like Harry still being alive and Quesada's illogical request to bring back Gwen Stacy, even though she died before Peter and MJ got married)

Actually, it was Straczynski who advocated bringing back Gwen Stacy, and it was Joe Quesada who turned down the idea, (though he was comfortable with bringing Harry back). Straczynski's original story indeed read like a "Butterfly effect", with Mephisto somehow altering the timeline so that Gwen never had kids with Norman, which gave Norman no reason to kill her, (thus, she's still alive today), and that leads to an unmarried Peter Parker who has multiple loves in his life, (thus, he's not settled down with "Mrs. Right" yet). Admittedly, while this makes for an intricate story, this would ultimately be a bad decision: it would wipe out 30+ years of Marvel continuity! That's like making the "House of M" universe, (or some other "What If" type story) permanent!

Quesada's editorially mandated version was simply that "It's magic. It can fix everything." A horribly lazy technique of solving problems. And that's the real problem I have with the "OMD" story.

Now the way that Dan Slott talks in some interviews, I remain hopeful that him and the other Spidey writers will someday flesh out exactly how Mephisto's deal works, (if they can find a way to explain this rewriting of reality, I'll be all for it), but we'll just have to see...


My main problems is that the new storylines have pretty much sucked. None of the writers (or editors, more likely) seem to understand Peter's character. Peter struggling to find his own apartment/work and to not suck at everything is fine when he's a 17 year old finding his way in the world and trying to fight crime at the same time but if you're still jobless, careerless, uneducated and mooching off your Aunt at 25, you need a slap. We've also had this 'Parker luck' shooved down our throats in ridicolous amount.

Well, he stopped living with his Aunt after the initial "BND" arc. But he still has money problems. But hell, I still have money problems, and my frickin' college degree was supposed to solve all that...:shrug:

And I personally still believe that he's in his early 30's by this point, but I digress...


All the new villains absoloutly suck.

Freak is the only true villain filled with "suck".

Mr. Negative is a cool new crime boss, with a relationship to Aunt May, (which fills the whole "place the loved one in danger" requirement).

Screwball is a fun, new character, (I can see a Batman/Catwoman relationship between her and Spidey).

Paper Doll is an intriguing, tragic character, (if they can move her past her obsession with that actor).

Overdrive has a fun power, (turning every vehicle he steps inside into a demonic race car).

The Bookie made for good comedy relief.

Menace is a poorly named villain, (why doesn't he have "Goblin" in his name somewhere?!?) and is too much of a blank slate to identify with right now.

The Diety looked cool, (as depicted by artist Chris Bachelo) but probably won't return again.

Yeah, overall, I'm satisfied with the villains.


The new supporting characters aren't remotely interesting.

I still overall tend to agree with that statement, but they're growing on me...

[James]

I haven't much to add, though I do feel BND was a terribly lazy editorial move that betrayed the character and its readership. Partially because it was a lazy reset, partially because - as Ed says - we know it will resolve, but mainly because I think its a very amateur approach to "fixing" problems you have within a book - evidence that Marvel hasn't really learned the mistakes from its previous attempts to "clean up" Peter's life.

If people haven't already done so, I heartily recommend the Life Of Reilly (http://lifeofreillyarchives.blogspot.com/2008/03/introduction-and-update.html)blog just so you can see the nightmares of the office politic when a story is forced on a book - when editors decide Spidey is getting too complicated and requires big retcons (the whole point of the Clone Saga being to remove Peter Parker). It's a fascinating read - shows you how everyone has to cope with the repercussions of such forced epics and how silly things become with so many fingers getting stuck in the pot.

If Peter represents the average joe with a great responsibility, then he shoudl be allowed to grow up as an average joe does, and have a marriage. I think Marvel needs to stop having these spats of retcons to keep their hero in their golden age of writing. Move on. If Clark can do it, so can you.

[Shawn Hopkins]

Wasn't Chris Claremont the one who killed off Jean Grey, only to turn around and bring her back to life years later?!? ;)



Not really. He planned to let her live, but Jim Shooter insisted she needed to be punished in some horrible way. Killing her was a compromise.

[W.C.Reaf]

I think OMD will be mockingly remembered as terrible story, like the clone saga is.

Once we see the bigger picture that Marvel is playing with we'll probably look back on these stories differently. A lot of the complaints I hear about BND that aren't about the marriage are usually along the lines of "Why haven't we found out about X story point yet?" So once the full picture is revealed things are going to be different.

Of course some fans are going to hate the new stories until things are back to the old continuity. On some Spidey message boards someone does keep posting (paraphrased) "If they aren't married I'm not reading it" for their comments on new issues. So I guess no matter what some people will dislike it.

I do have to add that we'll probably see some changes to BND soon in terms of story content because of it being a thrice monthly book it's written well in advance that I believe the stories coming out now are the ones that were being made when OMD was coming out. So before was more guess work as to how OMD was going to turn out (in the details) and now they have exact info for what's happened with Spidey over the last seven months (as they wrote it) so I suspect things will be tighter.

That's just optimistic thinking, though.

[Antiyonder]

I do have to add that we'll probably see some changes to BND soon in terms of story content because of it being a thrice monthly book it's written well in advance that I believe the stories coming out now are the ones that were being made when OMD was coming out.

While the three issues a month or four titles does allow them to milk their character, it will also hurt the longevity of the character that OMD/BND was suppose to preserve.

See, three issues/multiple titles result in plenty of story ideas being used up at a fast rate, thus limiting the number of stories that other writers down the line can tell.

[Ed Liu]

Wasn't Chris Claremont the one who killed off Jean Grey, only to turn around and bring her back to life years later?!? ;)

Actually, it turns out that resurrecting Jean wasn't Claremont's idea (and, according to this report (http://www.brokenfrontier.com/lowdown/details.php?id=305), he was against it). For this, we can credit/blame Kurt Busiek for the original idea (http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/2005/12/15/comic-book-urban-legends-revealed-29/), Shooter for approving it, and John Byrne and Bob Layton for putting it into FF and X-Factor comics. The other difference is that there were years between Jean's death and rebirth, and everyone involved with Jean's first death treated it as permanent. Same goes for stuff like the deaths of Jason Todd or Mar-Vell.

JMS has stated that he always wanted to undo all the events of "Sins Past" right before he left the title, which seemed like either a lame "it's not my fault that you hated the story" excuse and/or a story written purely to be shocking, especially since the story doesn't have the benefit of social commentary that something like South Park can claim. I'm not sure how many people really thought that Hawkeye was going to be permanently killed after "Avengers Disassembled," but it certainly didn't seem that surprising to me when he came back as quickly as he did. It seems that the really shocking events these days are written specifically to be undone.

Then again, it might just be that I don't care much for the ideas or the execution. In a way, something like "Planet Hulk/WWH" could be dismissed on the same grounds ("Come on -- who thought they were really going to eject the Hulk from Earth forever!"), except I liked that one. A lot of stuff happened during Walt Simonson's Thor run and much of it is totally awesome, but the only real permanent change after it was all done was the death of Odin.

Time will tell whether OMD will be one of those changes, I guess. My personal guess is that it won't get undone as long as Joe Q is in charge, since going back on it would essentially be admitting he was wrong, and he doesn't tend to do things like that. As W.C. Reaf mentioned, I think it'll end up like the Clone Saga -- a moment that'll end up mostly derided and ignored by Spidey fans and writers.

-- Ed

[Mad Monkey 7]

I rather read "Mr & Mrs.Spider-man" than BND spider-man titles. That and spider-girl. Joe Q is wrong, the marriage was never the problem, it was his stories and writers. :evil:

[Spideyzilla]

I rather read "Mr & Mrs.Spider-man" than BND spider-man titles. That and spider-girl. Joe Q is wrong, the marriage was never the problem, it was his stories and writers. :evil:

JMS did great.

[W.C.Reaf]

JMS did great.

Well except for Sins Past. ;)

[Spideyzilla]

I wouldn't mind the reset as much if the new stories were actually any good. The deal with the devil and the fact that the continuity now makes no sense whatsoever (and BS like Harry still being alive and Quesada's illogical request to bring back Gwen Stacy, even though she died before Peter and MJ got married) and goes entirely against... every single bit of characterisation I've ever read about Spider-Man. Really, a butterfly effect would've been so much better for setting up the new premisis.

My main problems is that the new storylines have pretty much sucked. None of the writers (or editors, more likely) seem to understand Peter's character. Peter struggling to find his own apartment/work and to not suck at everything is fine when he's a 17 year old finding his way in the world and trying to fight crime at the same time but if you're still jobless, careerless, uneducated and mooching off your Aunt at 25, you need a slap. We've also had this 'Parker luck' shooved down our throats in ridicolous amount.


All the new villains absoloutly suck. The new supporting characters aren't remotely interesting. Hopefully the inclusion of Eddie Brock and The Green Goblin in this new arc will pick things up a bit.

The recent Mark Waid back up was good. I am looking forward to his arc.

Lots of good points, but I don't understand what you mean about Gwen. BND is way too jokey and light hearted. Spidey himself is on the verge of being annoying.