Renew Your Vows #1 Lettered Preview

26 Comments

1. With the exception of the child being called Annie and not May this is the Spider-Man we should’ve had 10-20 years ago.

   Outside of Mr. And Mrs. Spider-Man by DeFalco has anyone ever honestly seen a Spider-Man comic book where anything remotely like the scene above has ever happened? You know a scene which is fresh and new but also an organic progression of Peter’s character that manages to still be about the theme of juggling real life responsibilities against the responsibility of being a superhero and being down to Earth at the same time?

   Slott talks a lot about how he’s giving us what we need not what we want but honestly that scene above is fertile creative ground for a decades old superhero to do something truly new. How can any of us NOT need that…especially at $4-5 per issue?

2. @#17-That’s was established in Bendis’ the Pulse book 10+ years ago in the arc where Norman got owned by Luke Cage. If this is a world where OMD never happened then that’d make sense.

   @#18-The interest in this though has gone beyond the interest in the book before then. People are more interested in this than they are both Star Wars and the main Secret Wars event. Even more than Spider-verse or Superior.

   I think you are wrong on that one. If sales are higher than expected and they’ve decided to NOT give the marriage back, yes they probably will go ahead with immediate plans which can’t be changed but their plans beyond that might be changed.

   So they will say high sales matter until they don’t

3. Another thing to consider here is that Slott might have named her Annie if she’s meant to be an orphan by the end of the mini.

4. I would actually like to see the Spidey/Who crossover some bearded guy talks about at the Philly con. Could’ve been fun,lol.

   J-R!

5. @#20- Yeah, I think that’s the case as well.

   I certainly think that Anna Maria’s creation and inclusion in the series kind of shows that Renew Your Vows was NOT on the docket when Slott took the reigns, and that plans for that character changed drastically.

   @#22- I really don’t think that this series will “show” how “bad” of an idea it will be for Peter to be married. Slott may not like it, and that might creep through his writing, but I don’t think that is what the title intends.

6. Despite the Annie thing…and the fact that the title suggests that we are going to be shown just how bad it would be for Peter to be married, I’m really liking the set up. Peter married to MJ with a kid. JJ head of the Bugle (and not a disgraced former Mayor working for a Fox News stand in.) yelling at people…stuff like that feels right for Spider-Man. A right I haven’t felt about Spidey for awhile now. If they show a flirt Black Cat that only steals but deep down really wants to be good, and a non-cancer ridden Eddie Brock venom, then I might actually *GASP!* like Spider-Man again.

7. Well… Slott could have named Annie after MJ’s aunt Anna, right?

8. Our world appears to no longer be capable of telling this hero’s story.
   Sometimes I think the problem here is that the big bucks spiderman
   is not owned by Disney, so their only chance to get him back is to retain a dumpy
   writer to ensure that Sony will not be able to mine any great stories that way.

   But I’m probably just over thinking it and Dan Slott has been making money in his own right
   and is obviously having a great time selling shlock. As far as story telling goes, Spider-verse
   was a bloviated twisted mess. They threw a bunch of new spider-characters at the wall to see
   which one would stick.

9. @#16- Regardless of how this series has sold, I think Marvel has already decided what the outcome will be.

   And, as I’ve said before, if Marvel WANTED to make this series a sales success, they would put all their effort into making it into one. Which they have already done. They WANT people to buy this. They WANT people to go out and pick it up. They WANT it to be important, over and above general fan interest in the series.

   So I don’t think this will be a situation of “The sales convinced us to give it a chance,” because given the sales history of the book over the past eight years, it should have already done that. Instead, I think it’s more a case of them already deciding where to go, charting out a course, then promoting and pushing the book and status quo so it WILL sell well, so then can THEN say that “The sales convinced them” to bring back the marriage (if it is coming back).

   Just look at what happened with Silk. It was clear that the Spider-Offices had already decided the course for her character. She would premier in an early arc of Spider-Man, star in Spider-Verse to help sell her presence, and then get spun off into her own series after Spider-Verse concluded. The “High Sales” never factored into the decision to give the character her own series. The creators already knew what they were going to do with her. But they used the “high sales” of the early issues of ASM to sell the notion that she was being given a series due to “High fan demand.” Problem was that Spider-Gwen happened at the exact same time, and showed an example of a concept actually taking off with the fans. But the situation remained the same- the creators already knew what was going to happen. They just had to sell it to the fans in the best way.

   So, I really doubt the positive sales will deter Marvel one way or the other on the issue, regardless of what they have decided. They will use the high sales to justify any decision they have chosen. They can say that the high sales convinced them to return the marriage, even thought they would have had to start working on the series that would come after Renew Your Vows long after any of the initial sales figures for the series came in. Or they can say that the high sales don’t really justify bringing back the marriage, because positive numbers now don’t really mean that it is a good thing “In the long run” for the character. Either way, the people in charge have already made up their mind, and I doubt anything would really cause them to change course at his point, regardless of where the series is going.

10. No one else is gonna comment on the fact that it appears that Ben urich know that peter is spiderman?

11. We already know this comic and its variants have gone back for reorders already.

    But I think this series, and this first issue in particular, is going to sell out huge.

    Seems like Marvel would at least want to start rethinking their anti-marriage bias at that point.

12. If ANYONE else was writing this book, I’d pick up at least the first issue or two, just to see where it’s going…but with Dan Slott is writing it, I have a funny feeling I know exactly where it’s going: straight down the crapper, with yet another middle finger to the fans.

13. The “This is why we can’t have nice things” title, however, COULD be referring to the fact that Peter is the only hero left to take on the powerful Regent, but feels he can’t take the same risks as the other heroes as he has a family that depends on him.

14. http://geektyrant.com/news/charlie-brown-and-spider-man-art-mashup-with-great-power-comes-great-grief

15. Pretty soon they are gong to start drawing Spider-man with a round head.

16. Just say Dan Slott. His name speaks for itself. He’s been having so much fun throwing spiderman into the trash. Thinks that’s the unique thing that makes the book great.
    Likens it to Charlie Brown, yeah that’s the ticket Spiderman is Charlie Brown man.

17. @10 – Gary you may be new here but we don’t talk that way about people here. Criticize the work all you want, but don’t make personal attacks. First warning. C’mon, surely you’re better than that.

18. Now Slott writes Peter as a bad father who refuses to even do the minor things of taking care of a child like changing diapers.

    I’ll be glad when that fat turd is off of the book

19. This is going to backfire on them, if fans really like the scenario.

20. @6 – That’s what I took from it, yeah.

21. @#5 QuilSniv — It also suggests his condescending statement to readers who are fans of the marriage.

22. Well, here’s the sad thing. The title of the first issue is our expression when we learned Dan Slott is writing the Renew Your Vows storyline.

23. @1 – It made me wonder if she was named after another relative of Quesada’s. And then it made me think of this song from the ’82 movie, in which a little girl wonders about parents she never knew.

    “Their one mistake was givin’ up me…”

24. I almost expect her to call Peter Daddy Secret Warbucks.

25. I’m sure Slott thought “A daughter with red-hair named ‘Annie’, oh I am so clever, my Twitter followers will love it and think I am so meta.”

26. Seriously, they named his kid Annie? His daughter is a redhead named Annie? Oh come on!