OK, crazy, sure. It sounds like an odd vanity project and all. But essentially harmless.
But then there's this from the Marvel's September solicits:
SPIDER-MAN: THE CLONE SAGA #1 (of 6)
Written by HOWARD MACKIE & TOM DEFALCO
Penciled by TODD NAUCK
Cover by PASQUAL FERRY
You’ve been asking for it...and now it’s here: THE CLONE SAGA!!! Marvel’s most controversial event of all time returns with a vengeance, presenting the Clone Saga as it was originally intended to be told! From the minds behind the crossover that changed comics forever and the artist that introduced Spider-Man to President Obama, it’s six issues of twists and turns that will shock fans old and new alike! Be here as Peter Parker’s worst nightmare begins again...now with an ending you have to see to believe!
32 PGS./Rated T+ ...$3.99
So...now we're going to have a series telling the Clone Saga story as it would have been had editorial and marketing not frelled it up.
This is pretty heady stuff. This is current Marvel editorial essentially saying that they frakked up their two biggest franchises back in the 1990s. It's as if they're going back and apologizing for their screw-ups, which is very un-Marvel.
I suppose next we can expect a series showing what would have happened had they not had Johnny Storm marry a Skrull, and a series detailing what would have happened had Heroes Reborn never happened.
And there's now hope, that 15 or so years from now, we'll get a 6-issue limited series detailing what would have happened in Spider-Man had One More Day never happened.
Well, we can hope.
3 comments:
They're also planning something related to the Clone Saga once the "Gauntlet" arc ends, if I understood correctly. I thought everyone hated the Clone Saga, and they already ended the "hated" (by the Spider-Writers) Spider-Marriage. Is there really a reason for this?
A companion series to "What If..?" call it "Marvel Do-Overs"
DC's done some similar stuff too. The best example I can think of is eventually making Monarch a version of Captain Atom which was apparently the original idea, and changed to Hawk at the last minute.
The big difference is exactly what you pointed out -- the acknowlegement by Marvel that the stories didn't end the way they were initally written.
The one thing that makes me wonder is if there's an alternative motive here. Marvel is trying their best to make Norman Osborn into a credible threat to everyone in the Marvel Universe. Most readers just don't see him as the kind of character who can rub elbows with villains like Doctor Doom or Loki -- villains who are a very legitimate threat to the big guns of the Marvel Universe (and have fought them time and time again). Taking a quote from the Wikipedia entry on the Clone Saga:
"the Jackal and many others had all been manipulated for years by Norman Osborn"
My guess is this and all other Clone Sagas will be chalked up to the work of Norman Osborn.
This way Marvel seems to be apologizing, but at the same time they're giving Norman Osborn more credibility as a villain.
Post a Comment