An interesting idea, but Jason actually caring about MJ would be a little too complex for a superhero comic. Yes, sometimes Spider-Man feels like a soap opera that happens to have a superhero as the main character, and soap operas sometimes have "the other man" genuinely love the woman he is pursuing.
If Tom DeFalco was writing this story, he might have made Jason more complicated and not an egoist looking for a quick lay after a long chase.
I miss Knight & Fogg. I recallt he hilariously stupid British accents Conway brought out of the woodwork to fill in the time Spidey was in London. "Nicely played, mate!" "Jolly good show!' "Oh raaaawthaaar!"
One of the things that bugs me about this is the fact that Blondie keeps being a prick and trying to get it on in public with MJ when she clearly doesn't want it, and the people in the restuarant and whatever are all just sitting there.
Is this like Eastenders, where a really loud conversation can only be heard by people in a one-meter radius?
Oh please, Fred was never looking for Daphne, he was looking for, if stoned enough, Shaggy, or following that one night where they all got complete blitzed on White Lightning following the case of the Moonshine Monster, Scooby, but they promised never to talk about THAT one.
I actually appreciate what I think it was trying to do, which seems to me to have been a) to give the newlyweds a bit of a trial by fire, and b) to turn the focus a bit more on Mary Jane.
Combining those two aims into a single story is actually better than trying to do them as separate stories, because no matter how handsomely Peter is drawn, the whole point of his relationship with Mary Jane is that he's the nerd who got lucky, so if HE'S the one who's tempted, it kind of makes him look like a jerk.
And realistically, since I believe this was when Mary Jane's SUPERmodel status was being played up, if either of them was more likely to be on the receiving end of attempted seductions, it was going to be Mary Jane, rather than Peter.
That being said?
This dude actually would have been more subtle if his name was Snidely Whiplash LeDouchebag, so it's not exactly doing Mary Jane any favors to show that she's still attracted to him even after he makes it pretty clear that he's a total fucking scumbag. Granted, any guy who tries to seduce another guy's wife is going to seem at least a little bit assholish, but they could have played up the "What sort of man neglects a wonderful woman like you?" angle, so that it at least SEEMED like he also had some genuine regard for Mary Jane as a person.
Also, Mary Jane not telling Peter? Not good. This was something that Peter and Mary Jane NEEDED to talk about - hell, it's something that they probably needed to FIGHT about, at least for a brief while, which would have had WAY more dramatic tension than Smarmy McAscot going MUAHAHAHAHA I HAF U NOW MY PRETTEH - before they finally reconciled, like the mature adults that they are. Not only would such a storyline have OMG BROUGHT THE DRAMA, but if done right, it would have left the Peter/MJ marriage in a STRONGER place than it was before.
So, full points for intent (assuming I'm reading the motives behind this story correctly), but the execution has some problems.
(assuming I'm reading the motives behind this story correctly)
Gerry Conway was the writer who killed Gwen and made Peter and MJ a serious couple, so I don't think there's any "But marriage to a supermodel would never work!!11" undermining trying to happen here. ;)
But I pretty much agree with everything you've said.
Yeah, I thought so, but without interviews from Conway at hand, I didn't want to risk mouthing off like a dumbass. :)
And this comment will probably make sound more negative than I want it to, but I guess what I still find problematic about this, in spite of its good intentions, is that it still sort of puts Mary Jane on an OBJECT level - I get the loneliness of a newlywed, but she goes from being attracted in spite of herself to a douche whose douchiness couldn't be more obvious if he was twirling a handlebar moustache, to being all I'M GONNA STAND BY MY MAN. I mean, it makes me uncomfortable, as a left-leaning guy with feminist intentions, because in my own fiction writing, I'VE DONE STUFF LIKE THAT, where the female character I want to show being all awesome and independent still becomes a bit of an appendage to the male hero. That being said, I think it's healthy for any writer to check their own subconscious tropes.
MJ had an abusive father, which explains her party girl attitude and her dating several jerks before marrying, including Flash Thompson. This would actually work as MJ falling back to her old self-harming attraction to assholes.
Mary Jane always had the same circle of friends as Peter, even before they became a serious item: Harry, Flash, (eventually) Liz. Some writers have tried to retroactively make MJ and Gwen best friends ala Betty and Veronica, but they weren't particularly fond of each other when Gwen was alive.
Hmmm, good point. No recurring ones certainly? I seem to remember her hanging around with her co-workers a lot back when Peter was dating Felicia though.
Spectacular Spider-Man 167 was the one chance I gave Spider-Man back in the day (after having read Parallel Lives and loved it). I liked the art (on the cover) - reminded me a bit of John Romita Sr. Then I read it and, er... didn't hook me.
OMG, those clothes, though. That hair. *cringes* Those... legwarmers? I assure you, when this came out, legwarmers were long gone as a fashion staple. :)
The disturbing thing about this Jerome character is that, taken out of context, almost all of his lines could have come straight from the male lead in a romance comic. All that 'we were destined to be lovers' stuff... "You want me as much as I want you"... "There's a certain cure for loneliness"... I swear, all he had to say was something along the lines of 'you little fool, can't you tell that I love you?', and the illusion would be complete. I half-expected her to melt into his arms, with an accompanying caption of 'At last - true love had found me! I would be lonely no more!'
Founded by girl geeks and members of the slash fandom, scans_daily strives to provide an atmosphere which is LGBTQ-friendly, anti-racist, anti-ableist, woman-friendly and otherwise discrimination and harassment free.
Bottom line: If slash, feminism or anti-oppressive practice makes you react negatively, scans_daily is probably not for you.
no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 12:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 12:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 01:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 01:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 03:51 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 08:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 12:48 pm (UTC)Y'know, the interesting thing is, I remember disliking this team on this book. Now? Gold, baby. Gold.
no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 01:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 01:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 03:45 pm (UTC)If Tom DeFalco was writing this story, he might have made Jason more complicated and not an egoist looking for a quick lay after a long chase.
no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 01:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 02:00 pm (UTC)I love it.
no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 02:01 pm (UTC)Is this like Eastenders, where a really loud conversation can only be heard by people in a one-meter radius?
no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 02:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 02:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 02:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 02:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 02:28 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 03:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 03:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 03:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 03:29 pm (UTC)THIS GUY WAS SECRETLY AN IRL COSPLAYER
no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 06:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 03:57 pm (UTC)Lessons I have learned from popular culture:
Date: 2009-05-12 02:44 pm (UTC)I have mixed feelings about this story.
I actually appreciate what I think it was trying to do, which seems to me to have been a) to give the newlyweds a bit of a trial by fire, and b) to turn the focus a bit more on Mary Jane.
Combining those two aims into a single story is actually better than trying to do them as separate stories, because no matter how handsomely Peter is drawn, the whole point of his relationship with Mary Jane is that he's the nerd who got lucky, so if HE'S the one who's tempted, it kind of makes him look like a jerk.
And realistically, since I believe this was when Mary Jane's SUPERmodel status was being played up, if either of them was more likely to be on the receiving end of attempted seductions, it was going to be Mary Jane, rather than Peter.
That being said?
This dude actually would have been more subtle if his name was Snidely Whiplash LeDouchebag, so it's not exactly doing Mary Jane any favors to show that she's still attracted to him even after he makes it pretty clear that he's a total fucking scumbag. Granted, any guy who tries to seduce another guy's wife is going to seem at least a little bit assholish, but they could have played up the "What sort of man neglects a wonderful woman like you?" angle, so that it at least SEEMED like he also had some genuine regard for Mary Jane as a person.
Also, Mary Jane not telling Peter? Not good. This was something that Peter and Mary Jane NEEDED to talk about - hell, it's something that they probably needed to FIGHT about, at least for a brief while, which would have had WAY more dramatic tension than Smarmy McAscot going MUAHAHAHAHA I HAF U NOW MY PRETTEH - before they finally reconciled, like the mature adults that they are. Not only would such a storyline have OMG BROUGHT THE DRAMA, but if done right, it would have left the Peter/MJ marriage in a STRONGER place than it was before.
So, full points for intent (assuming I'm reading the motives behind this story correctly), but the execution has some problems.
Re: Lessons I have learned from popular culture:
Date: 2009-05-12 03:15 pm (UTC)Gerry Conway was the writer who killed Gwen and made Peter and MJ a serious couple, so I don't think there's any "But marriage to a supermodel would never work!!11" undermining trying to happen here. ;)
But I pretty much agree with everything you've said.
no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 03:28 pm (UTC)And this comment will probably make sound more negative than I want it to, but I guess what I still find problematic about this, in spite of its good intentions, is that it still sort of puts Mary Jane on an OBJECT level - I get the loneliness of a newlywed, but she goes from being attracted in spite of herself to a douche whose douchiness couldn't be more obvious if he was twirling a handlebar moustache, to being all I'M GONNA STAND BY MY MAN. I mean, it makes me uncomfortable, as a left-leaning guy with feminist intentions, because in my own fiction writing, I'VE DONE STUFF LIKE THAT, where the female character I want to show being all awesome and independent still becomes a bit of an appendage to the male hero. That being said, I think it's healthy for any writer to check their own subconscious tropes.
no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 04:30 pm (UTC)Re: Lessons I have learned from popular culture:
Date: 2009-05-12 04:01 pm (UTC)I also figure that they talked about it later. Just because.
Re: Lessons I have learned from popular culture:
Date: 2009-05-13 05:19 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 02:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 03:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-13 01:53 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 10:31 pm (UTC)Hehe.
no subject
Date: 2009-05-13 12:03 am (UTC)OMG, those clothes, though. That hair. *cringes* Those... legwarmers? I assure you, when this came out, legwarmers were long gone as a fashion staple. :)
no subject
Date: 2009-05-13 01:18 am (UTC)