> After all this time do YOU feel that the OMD/BND arc has helped or hurt the Spiderman comic. >

I think it still casts a pallor over the Spidey books at the moment, but one that’s lightening all the time (as witnessed by the enormous sales and the issue-after-issue sell-outs on “New Ways To Die”), and I think that in the long run it will have helped a very great deal.


That's a very honest answer. And I think you deserve to be commended for not beating around the bush on it.

Posted by cjmcaree on 2008-10-15 15:09:52
First, hi Tom and everyone! I've been reading this blog for a while now, and I just registered so I could comment on this post, so I thought I should take a moment to say hello.

Anyways, I only just started picking up Spider-Man with the "New Ways to Die" arc, so I missed all the deal-with-the-devil excitement. But reading Tom's explanation on the pros and cons of Faustian intervention versus divorce, another thing occurs to me. If two characters are going to break up, there should probably be an actual reason - one that's established in advance, developed over time, et cetera. As far as I know, Peter and Mary Jane have always been as happy as clams, so there's no particular reason for them to split up other than blatant editorial intervention. In that case, a stock comic-book device like, um, demonic meddling seems like a better mechanism for performing that intervention.

This begs the question of whether the editorial intervention in question was necessary in the first place. Sounds like everyone at Marvel has thought so for a long time, and obviously there are plenty of readers who disagree, but if you're determined to go through with it I think the devil-and-mindwipe combo is probably a better option than arbitrarily torpedoing a consistently happy marriage. Personally, I'm just enjoying Anti-Venom. :-)

Posted by toysdream on 2008-10-15 15:38:47
I'm not sick of talking about it
I am far from voicing my opinion about this matter. I am persistent and I believe the dissent has ramped up in the past few months.

Everything about this feels wrong.

This is not Spider-man.

This is not Peter Parker.

Its not a bad comic book, JRJR is the business, its just not the best comic book, like it was immediately leading up to OMD.

This comic book will always sell well, its just too entrenched in pop culture in general for it to fade away.

But do we want to settle for something truly mediocre, especially when the means that got us to mediocrity are so reprehensible?

We have a great venue to express our opinions and I see no reason to stop doing so.

Snootchie Boochie

Posted by coolhanddave on 2008-10-15 15:52:50
I've got no problem...
With where Spidey is at today. The stories have been like such a breath of fresh air, it reminds me of what it was like post-clone wars. Reading SPIDER-MAN FAMILY today, I was reminded of what it was like in the 113 - 115 era with the Doc Ock / Hammerhead story. Fantastic stuff then, and it's just as good as what you guys are putting out now.

I liked MJ and I didn't really want them separated. I remember when they got married in Shea Stadium! But these things are bigger than me.

I'm just looking forwards to what comes next! :)

Posted by pmpknface on 2008-10-15 16:25:25
OMD was a GOOD thing, House of M topics
ASM needed to be a "SOLO" book, not a "team-up" book, and it was a "team-up" book with MJ married to him. She became his "Robin" always dragging him down. She HAD to be in every story, because she was his wife. And to not have the wife in every story wouldn't have made sense, therefore she had to go.

House of M had Peter with GWEN, but it was actually about UNCLE BEN. His "wish" (plot of House of M) was that Uncle Ben never died. Therefore he never became a hero, never fought villains, Gwen never died. His wish was not "To be with Gwen." The reason he still think of Gwen is NOT because she's "His true love," it's because he feels GUILTY for causing her death by being Spider-Man. That's why she's on his mind.

Posted by pineappleprotein on 2008-10-15 16:26:26
Hey Tom,

I bought and/ or read nearly every Marvel Comic from around 1980 to January of this year. Since then I haven't BOUGHT a single new comic. OMD killed my love for the entire Marvel Universe (Civil War had a big hand as well) and I won't be back, unless something major changes. I know, I know Boo Freaking Hoo, right? I still "read" every.single.book every month, but I won't be buying. I still care for the characters, just not for the way the current crew writes them. Not a big deal at all, unless other people get the same idea....Question: What is worse/ better to you as a representative of Marvel Comics: Quiet fans, who are unhappy, who just give up and move on to other things (i.e. other companies or interests), or Angry Fans who are ACTIVELY trying anything they think of to cause Marvel to change what they are doing (clogging up messages boards with the same responses over and over, e-mails, etc…)?


Posted by rebeldragon on 2008-10-15 17:22:32
Anakin
You know who would play this post-BND Spider-man?

Hayden Christensen

He's got that perfect mix of whiny-ness and total lack of confidence.

It's just not right.



Posted by coolhanddave on 2008-10-15 17:57:30
Mucho Thanks
Thanks again Tom for some thoughtful responses. Contrary to the impression that there are hurt feelings I thought it was worth reiterating that it's pretty forthcoming of you to have the level of contact that you've maintained with fans through the blog.

Posted by hamgravy on 2008-10-15 18:34:54
....
Nice. But I must disagree with your clearly athiest response concerning the threat posed by Spidey's "devil-deal" to children in America. Like many of the fans here, I do believe that supernatural entities (both benevolent and malevolent) exist.


Posted by Aziroth on 2008-10-15 20:26:33
I don't think it was a clearly atheist response. But you have to admit that, atheist or not, a young man growing up to get a divorce is a much more likely scenario that him making a deal with Satan. I think the point he's making in a fair one, and was actually convinced by it, though I am a theist.

Posted by kyle-latino on 2008-10-15 20:44:47
I really appreciate your willingness to answer some pretty tough questions and giving honest answers that fans have been wishing for, but I completely disagree with your assessment of OMD. The way so much continuity was thrown out by the deal with Mephisto has tainted the entire experience of reading comics for me. My big question is this: How can you expect fans to take any major event seriously after OMD, since now we know it can be thrown out by a magic deal twelve issues later (Spidey unmasking for example)?

Posted by megamile15 on 2008-10-15 22:03:07
I do not really see accepting the deal any more heroic than not accepting it, as Peter did not actively do anything to achieve it.

Mephisto came to Peter and offered the deal and MJ attempted to negotiate better terms. It almost feels like Mephisto acted more "heroically" than Peter (if we discount immense power).

It feels akin to a soldier in a temporary "safe zone" allowing someone else to take his few remaining bullets so that that person can save the soldier's troop.

I also find it far more selfish to make accept a deal with a demon and more responsible not to.


Posted by mattmrvl on 2008-10-15 22:05:12
Mr. Brevoort,

You wrote the following in your blog on "Day 3":

"...nobody's first or even fifteenth option is going to be, "Let's undo "One More Day"--that'll get the readers back!" Because it won't, not under those circumstances. T he elimination of the Spider-Man marriage has been a long-sought goal going back twenty years, almost to teh day that it took place. Over that time, it's been tried once or twice, but nobody had the intestinal fortitude to see it through to the bitter end, and to ride out the wave of anger and hurt that was sure to come in its wake. Heck, one of the main reasons for the Clone Saga was to eliminate the marriage, and that was ten years ago. Whether you liked "One More Day" or you didn't, I'll give Joe Q credit not only for having the stones to go through with such a plan and stick to it, but also to draw it himself, and so put himself front-and-center on the bullseye. Now that we're here, though, now that the hard part has been done, only a very stupid person would turn around and drive the series back into that status quo."

I think you've got it backwards, Mr. Brevoort. Going back to the clone saga...do you have any idea how much respect Marvel gained from me and a boatload of fans when they were willing to back away from their plans to replace Peter with Ben Reilly? I remember turning to my wife and other local fans...the 'Net wasn't much of a factor in all of this back in those days, or at least I certainly didn't know about Spider-man websites...and saying that THAT was class. Listening to the fans, reversing what the editors decided and in essence acknowledging that they had made an error in judgment, in order to make the fans happy and win them back, was the perfect example of good customer relations and classy management. Heck, in the wake of that restoration of Peter Parker (the married guy) as "the true Spider-man", I tripled the number of Marvel books I'd been buying before the clone saga began. I have NEVER admired people, whether in politics or in business or in personal relationships, who bullheadedly "stay the course" when there is such an avalanche of disagreement and evidence that the course is wrong. Such "intestinal fortitude" and "stones" are not admirable here...they are alienating traits that show a disturbing lack of connection with the customers who have continued, and would continue, to support Marvel's products for years to come and would bring the next generation in. You can cite all the reasons why you believe this was a good decision, but there are multiple tens of thousands of individual fans who have stopped reading Spider-man books because of this, and the primary reason sales have not been completely trashed has been because the three-times-a-month publishing schedule, which compels the remaining readers to purchase more books per month, has been a whopping success.

"Only a stupid person would (return to) that status quo?" Are you kidding?! That status quo, along with the excellent writing of JMS, had helped to propel ASM to the top of the charts without any 3-times-a-month publishing schedule. The development, evolution, and married existence of Peter and MJ made this book far more special. Peter's supporting cast could easily be a major part of the book while he's married, conflict with having to run off to play hero could still be portrayed with his friends and co-workers...heck, the only thing Peter Parker couldn't do was date other women, and, really, that is not as important as what we had. Yes, I left the book...the only other time in 34 years, mind you...when the Clone Saga rewrote history to say that I'd been reading about a clone instead of the "real deal." You DON'T dishonor the history and continuity that the readers have stuck with over the years...it's what made Marvel special and allowed us to be immersed in this fictional world. You've wiped that willing suspension of belief away with OMD and rendered any progression the character may have in the future meaningless...or the past...meaningless. Whereas I've heard that some of the current tales being published are decent while others are true klunkers, I cannot find myself caring about what happens to the characters in the post-OMD universe.

And when you say that undoing One More Day would not win fans back...I think you're way off base there, too. As I said, after the clone saga was reversed and Marvel thus won back my respect and allegiance, I tripled my purchasing of its product to around 20 books per month...whereas I currently now only purchase Secret Invasion (until it is over), Ultimate Spider-man (which, without ASM as my anchor book to Marvel, is soon to be dropped) and the soon-to-be-defunct Spider-Girl. Many fans with whom I have communicated over the last year have said they would return if Marvel would undo One More Day and restore the marriage. That's tens of thousands of likely returnees who would be purchasing ASM 3x/month and, for a sizable portion of those, resubscribing to other books they've dropped...whereas the vast majority of the people who have continued to purchase despite OMD have demonstrated that they'd read both a married and an unmarried Spider-man, thus strongly suggesting that the loss of fans would likely be minimal while the gain would likely be quite sizable. I also know of Marvel creators who disagree with this move and wanted the marriage to stay, and I'm sure the majority of creators would be just as pleased to write either incarnation of Spider-man, so I find it hard to believe you couldn't attract the suitable talent to make it once again a major success for both the diehard fans and the ones who require the marriage's restoration and the undoing of OMD in order to have their readership similarly restored.

I'm sorry you are making your blanket statement that OMD will not be reversed and that the retroactively unmarried Spider-man is here to stay. I really wish you, Mr. Quesada, and anyone else in positions to make a difference would reconsider and hear the outcry instead of digging in your collective heels and insisting that you'll hold the line for five years if necessary. There would be very few people who would fault you for backing away from that insistence and providing the product that so many customers say they prefer. Indeed, it would likely gain Marvel an enormous amount of restored respect and readership.






Posted by jeffgamer on 2008-10-15 22:20:38
Tom, keep up the good work in ASM. Buying, reading and enjoying it.

If you're still answering questions, Carnage MAX mini...c'mon.

C'MON! If you let me write it, I'll give you half my sandwich and some internet money.

Posted by BlackToe on 2008-10-15 22:29:19
I agree with jeffgamer
I stopped reading Spider-man after the first issue of BND, and I promise you I will start reading again if Marvel fixes its mistake.

Posted by megamile15 on 2008-10-15 22:38:05
Jeffgamer
What about the people that ARE enjoying ASM currently? What do you think they're going to do if Marvel caves in to your "demands"?

I can tell you this right now from a single person out of many who enjoy this status quo, that I have no intention of reading or buying into that status quo if reversed. I have absolutely no interest in reading about a stale go nowhere marriage thats long past its prime.

Posted by BlackToe on 2008-10-15 22:44:29
If you want young single Peter Parker, I'd suggest Ultimate Spider-man.

Posted by megamile15 on 2008-10-15 22:49:43
Knife is sharpened
Tom,

At least someone at Marvel is starting to come to the realization that many fans are really angered about ruining the hero we have loved and collected for years. For me it has been 30+ years.

You said: Divorce is real. Divorce is ugly. And divorce is still a hot-button issue in parts of the country. When you talk about the moral implications of Spider-Man making a deal with the Devil, they are magnified a million times if he chooses to get a divorce.... Ironically, nobody in the wider world cares at all that Spidey made a deal with the Devil—the public at large understands in that it’s all make-believe.

You do realize that a lot of people also believe that the devil is real, don't you? Yes, he doesn't pop up in a visible way every day where you can make a deal with him, but the devil exists and is far more dangerous than divorce. The reason why we are so pissed off is because Spidey IS an American icon. Having our hero making a deal with the devil is evil. It's disgusting.

You said: So I guess my question to you would be, how do you think we should be addressing this anger?

Let me see... maybe admit you were wrong and undo it????


Posted by HiddenVorlon on 2008-10-15 22:52:30
Looking for clarification !
Hey Tom !

Aren't all of Marvel's products a fantasy? Every comic, movie, toy, game, etc? If that is the case, then how is a divorce between Peter Parker & MJ more problematic than Hank Pym beating his wife Janet? Or Crystal's unfaithfulness to Quicksilver, or several other illustations you and I could come up with? What then is the real issue for Marvel? Is Marvel truly concerned about the affects of a comic (fantasy) divorce on children morally? Or is that secondary to the potential for lost profits resulting from the Spider-icon getting a divorce? On a related note, let's take a look at the recent successful Iron Man movie. Tony Stark (as portrayed by Robert Downey Jr.) is a womanizing alcoholic. What then is the message Marvel is sending to young boys and young men? Isn't the message, it's okay to drink at all hours and to have multiple sexual liasons? In sum, I am asking for clarification regarding both OMD/BND and the larger picture of Marvel as a company. What's the bottom line? Promoting good morals or profit?

BTW: Did Joe Q notice that men were smoking cigarettes in the first issue of Sub-Mariner: The Depths?

Posted by Mon Morn Lunatic on 2008-10-15 23:29:45
Youth?
I would have to disagree that Spiderman was and is about youth, he was never about "youth". The character was and has always been "The regular Joe/nerd type character, that the average person was suppose to relate too. Growing up, getting married, this was all part of a regular joes life. It's why I started collecting in highschool 25 years ago. Takeing that aspect out and keeping him "forever young" like Archie, completely ruins the character.

I honestly can not fathom how JQ and the rest can not see this, it's clear as crystal. MJ was the reason Pete did half the Amazeing things he did, take her out of the equation and he dies duering Kraven's Last Hunt. That's why Spiderman is dead to me, I know he doesn't live through that with out MJ and MJ wasn't there, not in the same context as a married version.

Telling us "we need Pete single and young", is just an excuse for poor writeing. The idea that the devil isn't "real" isn't a good conclusion either, millions of people believe there is a "real" devil just as much as they believe real divorce happens. So you had a main character, who's whole life was lived by the creedo "with great power comes great responsability" runs away to the devil to fix things. Knowing full well the devil never does anything with out rubbing your nose in it. Wich brings another problem, Pete doesn't even remember anyway, so the whole thing becomes a poor plot device to implament JQ's revised history.

Marvel can blow smoke all they like with claims about all these "uber" sales, despite the fact that many of us know thats blantantly false, simply by speaking to the LCS. I know for a fact that the sales have droped 90% in my area, you aren't getting very many new readers either, because Kids don't read comcis when they have Xbox and Youtube.

So the real question is, how long before OMD is corrected and the marriage reinstated?..How long before JQ and company admit they made a mistake and correct it? How many more fans will this book loose before reality finially sets in?

Posted by IGorean on 2008-10-15 23:31:16
megamile15
"If you want young single Peter Parker, I'd suggest Ultimate Spider-man."

Why? I already have both and enjoying them greatly. I havent enjoyed reading ASM like this in the last 15 years. I'm gladly supporting it.

Posted by BlackToe on 2008-10-15 23:32:40
I'm just saying most of us like characters who are allowed to grow and evolve and aren't stuck in the same place as they were in the 70's. So you like BND. That's cool. But you are in the minority.

Posted by megamile15 on 2008-10-15 23:42:22
megamile15
I disagree. If I was in the minority, the marriage would be in place and I would'nt be buying the title. Not to mention, you have NO solid evidence to support that claim.

And besides, high profile Marvel characters will NEVER and I repeat NEVER grow and evolve past a certain point. Thats not good long-term business sense. Especially for Spider-man. Its good for some characters like Conan or the sword and sorcery comics back in the day. Or lower tiered characters. There's a reason why Franklin Richards is still a damn kid despite being born in the 60's (or 70's I cant remember).

The point that Spider-man and his "growth" was at, was absolutely horrible. The next evolutionary step in his "growth" would be to have a kid or hug/save/kiss MJ as a last panel for the billionth time. Spider-man would be a horrible father (And Marvel "banning" that development before JQ took the reigns) and we all know Marvel went down the other road to the point of exhaustion.

I also keep hearing rehash complaints of the 60's/70's/80's. Like thats any kind of leg to stand on given technically post-OMD mostly ALL of Spider-mans stories were done to death. ie: Venom, MJ stories, marriage stories, symbiotes.

Even the Fraction annual was BASED OFF of old stories saving MJ...again.

Posted by BlackToe on 2008-10-15 23:58:22
BlackTom
Most people I've talked to hate it, and most people on these boards seem to hate it as well. And most estimated sales figures I've seem have shown significant drop, although NWTD is bringing them back up. That suggests that the majority of fans are unhappy with it.

And I'm sure they'll never let Spider-man grow into an old man or anything, but SOME evolution is a good thing. I'm pretty sure no one was begging for Harry to be brought back or for Peter to live with Aunt May and be unemployed again. OMD put Spidey EXACTLY where he was in the 70's. If the pre-OMD stories were done to death, are the "Oh no! My web fluid!" and "Golly gee, I hope Aunt May doesn't figure out my secret!" moments supposed to be fresh? No one is saying the pre-OMD stories were perfect, but I would rather have them than the new retro stories.

Posted by megamile15 on 2008-10-16 00:21:42
BlackToe
Crap sorry about the name.

Posted by megamile15 on 2008-10-16 00:27:15
Skrull in South Park!!!
New South Park last night! At 0:26 minutes in, right as Wendi is about to punk Cartman, the camera shows the school on the left, and the mud pit and slide on the right. At the bottom left of the screen, clear as day, there is a boy with green ears, a green neck, and green hands, Skrulls have invated South Park!!! (Or it's a kid with green earmuffs, a green scarf, and green gloves...)

Posted by thomas more on 2008-10-16 00:39:05
Can any core character in a comic book be married? Are Mr. and Mrs. Fantastic going to be killed off or meeting with Mephisto anytime soon? Okay, that's the only married couple I can think of in the MU. There's still Cyclops and Phoenix, but you're going to be fixing that next year from the sound of things.

Posted by thomas more on 2008-10-16 00:47:56
megamile15
"[i]Most people I've talked to hate it, and most people on these boards seem to hate it as well. And most estimated sales figures I've seem have shown significant drop, although NWTD is bringing them back up. That suggests that the majority of fans are unhappy with it.[/i]"

The internet doesnt mean squat as well as forums dont equate to general population. I can even show right now a forum full of people who actually like/love and will continue to support ASM. The CBR boards.

And as for THIS particular board. I've been here arguing this for 3 years+ here. Even before Back in Black. I know this community and 5-13 regular vocal posters dont equate to a sweeping majority.

I'm not even going to touch the estimates and their validity WITH refs and quotes. Its been beaten to death already. But I can assure you, I can.

"[i]And I'm sure they'll never let Spider-man grow into an old man or anything, but SOME evolution is a good thing. I'm pretty sure no one was begging for Harry to be brought back or for Peter to live with Aunt May and be unemployed again.[/i]"

Nobody was begging for Bucky to be brought back either. But Spider-man's supporting cast was DEAD. Almost literally. In a book that was once hailed and revered as a book with a excellent legendary supporting cast bar none, was reduced to MJ panels and Aunt May. Marvel has the ammunition to bring him back and they dont need permission, ie: Goblin Formula and Normans high popular existence.

And technically here, fans WERE asking for Spider-man to bring anybody back during his "new" powers, organic webbing, the Other and unmasking not to mention denouncing JMS. Everybody would'nt shut up about it.

[i]"OMD put Spidey EXACTLY where he was in the 70's. If the pre-OMD stories were done to death, are the "Oh no! My web fluid!" and "Golly gee, I hope Aunt May doesn't figure out my secret!" moments supposed to be fresh? No one is saying the pre-OMD stories were perfect, but I would rather have them than the new retro stories."[/i]

I would say Marvel reset Spider-man before he was damaged. Which was in the early 90's. Not 70's. To me and many others, THIS is the real Spider-man where we left him.

And its a good thing I dont base my buying habits or enjoyment on small things like web-fluid or Aunt May, like alot of people seem to be doing. And for correction, its EVERYBODY doesnt know his ID. Thats a story coming up.

There's a reason why media faucets or "pop culture memory" dont remember any story from mid-90's and up. Ironically, OMD out performed that entire boring era in that regard solely on the attention it received.

Posted by BlackToe on 2008-10-16 01:20:49
"So I guess my question to you would be, how do you think we should be addressing this anger? "

Tom, I understand you're honestly trying to reach out to fans here all the time but all you're really doing is enabling those who have sought to keep this arguing alive for the most petty and bitter of reasons.

Some of these people, with all due respect, are not looking for answers as to why Marvel did it anymore, they got those loooong ago.

It's nothing more than posturing, barking at authority figures, lashing out at self percieved flaws in Amazing and letting off steam at this point.

Not everybody has to like the stories in Amazing, sure, but the specific subsection of the fans you're trying to reach out to are a lose cause and live by their outrage for the solution they know you won't give them.

Posted by Dr. Chaos on 2008-10-16 01:29:34
Bah.

Thats lost...not "lose".

Damn these crinkled hands.

Posted by Dr. Chaos on 2008-10-16 01:31:49
In answer to your q to me, Tom...
To begin with, thank you for answering my questions.

I have to disagree with your first answer on the grounds that being a fantasy book, the devil can be real in that context (and to a lot of people in the real world, they think the devil is real), and a hero making a deal with the devil is in general, not heroic, and offensive too.
Divorce may be ugly, but it is real. It's tangible. It would have forced Peter to grow. A dues ex machina at the last minute as a plot device to get ouf of a corner of Marvel's own making wasn't the best way to get out of it at all, in my opinion - especially not when the person being saved by the deal has died before, and more so when their death would have made Peter grow up and move on; not regress and lose his partner, his marriage, and his future child. On that point, you said a life is a life when asked about Aunt May? What about his daughter? He didn't bother to find out about that little girl in OMD (very uncharacteristic), and now her futurer life has been sacrificed. If we're being honest here, the real issue Marvel faced on that one is aunt may can be a plot device. A daughter, or the potential for one, would have aged him. Life isn't the issue and we all know it.

Now, in answer to your question to me:

"how do you think we should be addressing this anger?"

Initially, i had a big, long response all typed up and ready to go...but it got lost in the ether, so i will try to be a bit more succinct this time!

I think macwagen summed it up best when he talked about the condescending and insulting manner in which fans have been treated.
Your first words in response to him were:

"Mac, I’m sorry if you felt condescended to in any way."

That is the best start i have seen to addressing fan anger thus far.
If we could hear these exact same words from Joe Quesada and Steve Wacker (one of the worst offenders for side-stepping genuine, honest fan questions and being insulting or condescending in response - in my opinion), it would go a long way to mending the rift, i believe.

This is really the problem. Our favourite character and his whole history have been ripped out from under us. Everything we have known Spidey to be for the last 20 years is no more, and a lot of other continuity factors are up in the air, or so it seems.
Every time i see a fan asking you guys a genuine question to try and gain some clarity, they usually end up getting insulted and chopped down to size.
Largely, more so than the new direction, this is what tipped me over the edge to stop collecting. I tried to at least buy the comics during BND to try and show some support for my favourite character (despite hating the premise the new direction was founded on), but the comics felt like they were lacking in comparison to Spidey pre-OMD (the writing was so sloppy at one stage there, Steve Wacker used a letters page to ask fans to come up with an explanation for a continuity glitch with the other books they created by instituting BND), and couple this with the way i saw concerned fans being treated, and well...it was one thing too many gone wrong. More so than anything, it was this behaviour that pushed me as a reader, away.

If everyone else at Marvel could actually answer fan questions, and show them some respect and dignity - much like you are doing with this blog - it would help tremendously.

As it stands, you may be doing this; but other creators are avoiding the whole issue, or when they are approached about it, they are insulting the fans who protest.
It would be nice to see those creators who talk to or write to the public come out and say that they know they angered a lot of fans with OMD and BND, that they can understand the anger, and then genuinely answer said fans' questions.

I hope i have clarified my view point a little better for you, and i look forward to reading your response.






Posted by aussie macca on 2008-10-16 01:44:20
Sales Figures
Comic Book orders from Diamond Comic Distributors for Amazing Spider-man
Issue # & estimated sales
537 114,800 542 105,678
538 142,930 543 106,478
539 137,723 544 146,170
540 119,624 545 124,406
541 108,217
Start of BND
546 127,856 559 74,184
547 101,132 560 73,991
548 97,881 561 72,345
549 101,048 562 71,382
550 90,817 563 70,766
551 88,029 564 68,868
552 89,808 565 69,168
553 82,624 566 68,898
554 81,048 567 68,094
555 86,885 568 93,346
556 78,442 569 77,909
557 77,041
558 76,944


Sales drop anyone?
Figures from:
http://www.cbgxtra.com/Default.aspx?tabid=695
And it states these are approximate figures.

Posted by megamile15 on 2008-10-16 02:05:47
multiple books
the thing I don't understand is...if wolverine can appear in 15 books a month, why don't they just have a spider-man title based on the pre-OMD status quo and one on the post-OMD status quo? that way both camps are happy, Marvel makes more money, and if one of the books doesn't sell well, they simply cancel it, and it offers Marvel some insight as to where to take the direction of the character...

Posted by insatiablesinner on 2008-10-16 02:06:02
It's great that you provide an open forum...
... where people are able to post dissenting opinions about things that they don't like.

But the continual and obsessional diatribes from the anti-BND brigade are severely weakening this forum. What we used to have was a forum where people could interract with each other and a senior Marvel editor.

What we now have is a forum for polarised diatribes, and I for one am utterly sick of hearing it. You don't like BND - fine, *we get it*, but you know what? *We don't care*! For god's sake, move on and let's talk about something (anything!) else

Posted by GS ManThing on 2008-10-16 04:43:01
Ah ha, and then there were two
Thank you insatiablesinner,

PUBLISH BOTH in '09

Posted by coolhanddave on 2008-10-16 08:31:18
I'd buy both
That's not true, I don't buy Marvel Adventures/Marvel Age Spider-man and this is pretty much the same feel as the kiddie stuff...a dumbed down version of the Spider-man we actually like.

but Publish both anyway in '09

Posted by coolhanddave on 2008-10-16 08:34:45
Just checked my typo's!
Just realised my earlier response to Tom had some typo's...it was early in the morning, people! lol.

Also, to GS Man Thing.....respectfully, i can understand that as someone presently pleased with the current status quo, you may feel uncomfortable reading the anti-BND posts - especially with the frequency with which these crop up.
But there is a section of fans out there at the moment who feel like they aren't being heard or acknowledged, and at this point in time, Tom offered up this forum specifically to give those of us in the "anti" crowd a chance to be acknowledged.
If he has no problem with doing so, i see no reason why you should be so vehemently against it. Let us have this chance, it will be over soon and you will get your ideal version of this forum back.
It is possible to please two sides of an argument and make both camps happy. Presently, Tom is trying achieve that goal. Let it be.

Posted by aussie macca on 2008-10-16 08:51:19
And another thing
I'm PRO-Spider-man.

I'm Pro-responsible usage of plot devices to progess a character naturally.

I'm Pro-JRJR working on ASM

I'm Pro-pre-OMD Peter Parker

I'm Pro-Constructive Criticism of a literary product I spend an increasing share of my income on.

I'm Pro-Publish Both in '09.

I'm Pro-Marvel making mine.

Posted by coolhanddave on 2008-10-16 09:00:44
i want this "debate" to end already
Here's where I am with all of this.

- I really liked the way and the care that was taken backing Peter into a corner where, by the time Mephisto showed up, it looked like he was out of options.

- I really hated the whole "actually making the deal with the devil" thing. Like a lot of people, I found it to be an almost lazy way to hit the reboot switch.

- I love the new direction of the title. Love it. I've really enjoyed every issue of Brand New Day (except a handful, all of them by the same writer who I'm not going to throw under the bus...but let's just say I think he's trying waaay too hard to capture the tone of the BND era and not working nearly hard enough on the storytelling or character work) and think that New Ways to Die is the best Spider-Man story in AT LEAST the last 15 years.

- Conclusion? I view One More Day as, to borrow a phrase Mr. Brevoort has used several times now, a "necessary evil" to the title to where it currently is. I've come to terms with that, because as good as JMS' run was, this is what I like to read in my Spider-Man books.

- On undoing the events? Tell me, seriously, what Peter Parker would do if told "well, you can have your marriage that you don't remember back...but your Aunt will be dead because of a bullet meant for you. Also? Harry goes back into the ground." There is no going back. Not that I'd want to.

Posted by BenMoser on 2008-10-16 09:18:52
I have to address your response to the deal with the devil question. Calling it fantasy is such a cop out yes divorce is Explicitly real, but making a deal with a devil although not physically possible is a real possibility in every situation. Everyday we are faced with choices that we can either do the right thing or the wrong thing. We have that little voice that says go ahead just put that book under your shirt you will not get caught, but we also have that voice that says no its wrong to steal. Human beings are capable of good and evil and writing a story where the main character who is supposed to value good making a choice to make a deal with the devil does send a message and I would contend a worse message than a divorce. Not all divorces are ugly granted majority probably are, but many people separate knowing they do not work together anymore. So please I ask again respect the fans intelligence and do not try to tell us that it’s ok because its fantasy. We know that the whole book is fantasy but that does not mean it reflects real choices and real situations.

Posted by spiderFAN1984 on 2008-10-16 09:49:03
Another Spidey Question
Rebuttal: I don't think that the 'Divorce is Real' argument is good enough to me. Marvel has not shied away from real life issues in the past, such as drugs and gang violence. I know you want to keep it as a fantasy, but I think you really missed an opportunity to address divorce to a culture that has an over 50% divorce rate, and besides... a little bit of fantasy helps the medicine go down. I don't think Marvel should have been scared to divorce Mary Jane and Peter Parker. But it's too late for that. Now my question.

Darkhawk. He's one of my 90's favorites. To me he was the Spiderman of the 90's only made more realistic. He didn't have super genius to rely on so when he did become a hero his real life fell apart. I could feel for the guy. And very often did Darkhawk team up with Spiderman, kinda like an understudy kind of relationship. Will we see them team up again? If not... could you send the idea down the line? I miss their teamups.

I guess I could also ask what kind of teamups are planned for the future, but I might be overstepping my bounds. But still... what kind of teamups will we see in the future? *LOL*

Posted by DRock1 on 2008-10-16 12:25:20
To Ben Moser...

How could they undo it? Easy. AUNT MAY SAYS NO. May learns of it...perhaps through MJ, who may well remember the original timeline/universe...and somehow undoes the pact. SHE would never accept it. Peter is absolved from having to reverse course.

And if people have a problem with Peter having still made the original deal with Mephisto...say the Skrull Puppetmaster was manipulating his behavior. Or Skrull Psycho-Man. Voila...Peter never was in full control during OMD, Peter doesn't undo it himself, done.

Posted by jeffgamer on 2008-10-16 13:32:09
Devil-dealing is fantasy.

Marriage is intangible.

At least you're being consistent this time.

But I don't see how an "intangible" can become so huge an issue as to be considered a "writing handicap".

Posted by rrargh on 2008-10-17 00:31:18
Marvel, you are all wrong
We didn't love Spidey because he was youthful or hip. We loved Spidey because we could RELATE to him. He wasn't the most hip. He wasn't popular. He wasn't the best looking. He had money problems.

All of these things we could relate to.

He finally got the girl. He fell in love and married her.

We could all relate to that.

Now, you have him trade his marriage to the devil. WE CANNOT RELATE TO THAT. No man worth existence would trade his marriage to the devil. It was a lazy plot device, it was stupid and it is morally offensive.

We don't want a Spidey who deals with the devil.

You have ruined a hero we all have loved. You have ruined an American icon. You gave longtime fans the middle finger.

Your sales figures are tanking and yet you refuse to admit it. You blew it.

Your customers are telling you that you are wrong. You should listen to your customers or you will find that your sales will continue to drop.

Posted by HiddenVorlon on 2008-10-17 23:19:05
What you can do.
You asked: "how do you think we should be addressing this anger?"

I say: Start a monthly spider title that exists in the universe where Peter rejected Mephisto's offer, where he continues to be married. If this doesn't sell well enough to justify itself as an ongoing title we will all be very surprised! So why not do it? At least as a 12 issue mini-series to gauge support? There appears to a big market for the continuing story of the 'one true spider-man'.

Posted by RedGuest on 2008-10-18 05:38:33
Devil-dealing is fantasy.

Marriage is intangible.

At least you're being consistent this time.

But I don't see how an "intangible" can become so huge an issue as to be considered a "writing handicap".

Posted by rrargh on 2008-10-19 21:09:18