Category Archives: Spider-Man

Girl Comics 2 (July 2010)

718959.jpg

It’s another terrible issue. Is Marvel trying to say all female creators can do are trite stories? Colleen Coover annoys with her opening…

Oh, wait. The Jill Thompson Inhumans story is fine. It’s predictable to the point I think I’ve read it somewhere before (Lockjaw getting a bath) but the art’s good and the writing’s inoffensive.

The next one is awful—it’s about a superheroine beauty parlor, from Coover with Kathryn Immonem writing. The uncredited letterer screws up the dialogue pacing but it wouldn’t be much better with competent word balloons.

Stephanie Buscema has a weak Doctor Doom two pager.

Faith Erin Hicks’s Nextwave story features a superhero killing teenagers. I guess that’s cool. You know, for a Disney comic. But it’s otherwise weak.

Abby Denson and Emma Vieceli’s superhero personals (starring Mary Jane) is lame.

Finally, Christine Boylan and Cynthia Martin’s Doctor Strange is well-illustrated but poorly written.

Girl Comics 1 (May 2010)

718958.jpg

Marvel should have tried harder with Girl Comics. It’s way too easy just to say, Girl Comics is bad comics.

The opening from Colleen Coover is weak. It’s so trite, the story featuring Nightcrawler getting saved by a nameless woman (writing by G. Willow Wilson, art by Ming Doyle) doesn’t seem so bad. The writing’s weak, but the art isn’t.

The next story, a Venus story (which breaks Atlas continuity), is okay. Trina Robbins’s script is okay and the Stephanie Buscema retro good girl art is nice.

Valerie D’Orazio and Nikki Brown then do a surprisingly effective Punisher tale. It’s contrived, but also sort of great.

Lucy Knisley has a cute Doctor Octopus cartoon.

Then it’s Robin Furth and Agnes Garbowska doing an illustrated text adventure for the Richards kids. Garbowska’s art is fantastic, making up for the rushed text.

Devin Grayson and Emma Rios’s X-Men finale is awful.

Marvel Treasury Edition 28 (July 1981)

25915.jpg

Was Jim Shooter paying himself by the word, because I don’t think I’ve ever read more exposition in a comic book. It’s terrible exposition too, but I suppose the sentences are grammatically correct. For the most part.

But what I can’t figure out is the artwork. The combination of John Buscema on pencils and Joe Sinnott on inks produces one of the worst eighties comic books I can remember seeing. Superman’s figure is strangely bulky, with a little head. But the facial features on everyone are awful. It’s a hideous thing to read.

The story concerns Dr. Doom trying again to take over the world, which is boring. The interesting stuff is Clark working at the Bugle and Peter working at the Planet. They should do a series. But not by Shooter, who makes Peter constantly horny.

Interesting to see the black chick after Clark though.

It’s an awful comic.

Superman vs. the Amazing Spider-Man (January 1976)

14664.jpg

It’s too bad this one doesn’t work out better, but at least it fails in an interesting way. Superman and Spider-Man simply can’t work together. It’s not so much the problems with them not matching powers—Lex Luthor zaps Spidey with some red Kryptonite powers to even the odds at one point—it’s the characters themselves, they’re too different.

The comic’s split into four parts. First is a Superman prologue, then a Spidey, then Doctor Octopus and Lex teaming up before the culminating team-up between Spidey and Superman. The first three parts work great. The fourth part barely works at all. Peter Parker and Lois Lane meeting up, professionally, it works great. Morgan Edge and Jonah getting hammered? Also great.

Superman calling Spidey “web-slinger?” Not great. Though Spidey gets away with calling him “Supes.”

The art hodgepodge makes it visually interesting, but not good.

It’s sadly charmless.

Spider-Man: Back in Quack 1 (November 2010)

771279.jpg

This issue, one of Marvel’s smorgasbord of one shots, is actually a Steve Gerber tribute issue. The feature is Howard the Duck (meets Spider-Man) and the backup is Man-Thing. Not sure why Marvel didn’t advertise it better, other than they missed a good memorial period by two years.

Stuart Moore does a fine job on the feature, with Spider-Man discovering Howard and Bev have been brainwashed by these corporate bad guys. It’s all very anti-establishment, but in a broad way. Moore’s not being a rebel, he’s just posing as one. I wouldn’t even mention it if it weren’t for the Man-Thing backup. In it, Moore discusses the problems with deranged veterans coming home from overseas. The solution? Getting zapped by Man-Thing.

The pencils on the feature are split between Mark Brooks and Ray Height. Brooks is better. Joe Suitor does the backup; he’s bad.

Osborn 5 (June 2011)

1790149-osborn5_super.jpg

DeConnick brings Osborn to a depressingly lesser conclusion. She needed another issue. She fast forwards a few weeks and everything’s resolved. It provides a nice narrative device (a Congressional hearing) but it’s not satisfying at all. Worse is the decision to narrate from Norah the reporter.

Norah is, as Norman points out, not special. She’s ordinary in an extraordinary world and if DeConnick had any particular insight into her, I’d have loved to see a Marvels revamp by DeConnick and Rios. Unfortunately, she doesn’t have any special insight because Norah’s a lame character. Instead of Veronica Mars, she’s barely Carrie from “Sex in the City.” Strange how gender works in the funny pages.

As for the art… Becky Cloonan isn’t on Rios’s level. I couldn’t identify Cloonan but a lot of the issue looked wrong.

It’s well-written and often beautifully illustrated, but it should’ve (and could’ve) been even better.

Osborn 4 (May 2011)

808597.jpg

So, yes, it turns out—unfortunately—I was right. Norman Osborn is a megalomaniac who needs an audience, so he keeps Norah the reporter alive. However, his sidekicks are very bad people who would not. But still they hang out with her. In fact, I wish Osborn was an issue longer because DeConnick has such a great time writing Norah with the supervillains.

By pairing Norah with Norman here, Rios gets to combine her two styles on the series and it’s no surprise the relatively calmer Norah art is moved aside for the frantic Norman art everywhere. The result is a visual feast—definitely the best art so far in the series.

DeConnick’s script continues to be really smart as well as engaging—setting Norman up against the Senator, turning her into the antagonist and toning Norman down to be a suitable protagonist finally… it all works.

It’s quite good.

Osborn 3 (April 2011)

799587.jpg

There’s a lot of great stuff in this issue of Osborn—my favorite is the way DeConnick mostly spends the non-Norman time with the senator, making it very different than what I expected. So after the utterly realistic scene where the Democrat senator realizes she’s getting blamed for sending Norman to a secret prison (shockingly, her Republican “friend” betrays her), DeConnick throws reality out the window.

Norah Winters has been present at Norman’s taking over the prison, up in an observation booth. He discovers her and brings her down to witness his return. Now, realistically, he’d have her torn into pieces or tortured or whatever. But he’s a supervillain, so he’s going to Bond villain her and bring her along. He hasn’t yet, but leaving her alive for a second makes it foreseeable.

And DeConnick’s otherwise thoughtful comic book becomes absurd.

It’s still good and the Rios art’s beautiful.

Osborn 2 (February 2011)

799584.jpg

Peter Parker fails to show up again this issue for more premarital sex, which is disappointing, but otherwise DeConnick is in fine form. Setting up a cult centered around Norman Osborn is a good plot point, as are some of the smaller developments. DeConnick knows how to tightly wind scenes and she’d probably do really well on a horror book.

Rios also continues to impress. She basically has the one style, but there’s intensity. Norman gets more feverish lines while the stuff at the Daily Bugle is far cleaner.

As for the Bugle, Norah Winters is still central to that side of the story. But Winters’s place at the paper, Marvel Universe or not, seems unrealistic. It feels like DeConnick is saddled with the cast and she’s having troubles making Winters work.

But all the Norman and supervillain stuff? It’s all great.

Osborn is, surprisingly or not, an excellent series.

Osborn 1 (January 2011)

skitched-20110618-115741.jpg

The first thing I noticed about Osborn is the Emma Rios artwork. She reminds of Paul Pope in a lot of ways. She’s very good, able to mix the implied evil and then the lighter comic moments with the Daily Bugle cast.

The second thing I noticed was the implication Peter Parker was rushing off a reporter to engage in some sort of sexual congress, possibility receiving the very clearly implied fellatio from his female colleague. I’m not up on my Spider-Man, so I don’t know if he’s dating her but it doesn’t seem like it. Does Disney know about this series?

Kelly Sue DeConnick is a smart writer, mixing the sensationalism (Norman Osborn’s a celebrity in the Marvel Universe, after all) with the more mundane newspaper reporting and prison procedures.

The Warren Ellis backup is cute (the Jamie McKelvie art helps on that front) but sort of unnecessary.

The Amazing Spider-Man 259 (December 1984)

28105-1.jpg

Lot of Ditko homage on the last pages, even with the filmic–especially for the eighties–pacing of Peter suiting up in the red and blue.

It’s sort of a weak finish to a great issue. Most of the issue–except some ill-advised attention on Hobgoblin (providing the action)–is Mary Jane telling Peter all about her life.

DeFalco does an amazing job with the Mary Jane stuff. It’s this heart-wrenching confession–as Mary Jane assesses herself and her past actions–mixed with Peter’s internal reaction. It might be one of the most touching comics I’ve read about a major property, just because it’s so delicate. It doesn’t even with Peter and Mary Jane heading off to the altar–far from it. DeFalco seems to be aware if he went that route, it’d flush the story’s value.

Frenz does an excellent job (albeit within his abilities) here too.

Peter Parker, the Spectacular Spider-Man Annual 4 (November 1984)

62249.jpg

Well, I’ve finally found something Bill Mantlo can write–little old ladies.

This issue is mostly about Aunt May and her mysterious behavior. Turns out her pre-Ben Parker boyfriend is back and sending her love letters and causing these very distracting walks down memory lane. Of course, New York’s in different shape than it used to be, so Peter and Nathan are freaking out. Spidey follows her, things get resolved.

It’s funny how well Mantlo writes May’s stuff, given how he overwrites the rest of the issue (and inexplicably retells Spider-Man’s origin). He doesn’t take any time to make Nathan sympathetic–he seems like a nasty old man–and Peter’s barely present.

The art’s fine, with some nice detail on the thirties New York panels.

Oddly, there’s the implication May never truly loved Ben Parker.

The Black Cat backup is moronic and infantile, though Randall’s art is decent.

Marvel Team-Up 146 (October 1984)

25865.jpg

Oh, those young toughs, how dare they break up a date between Peter Parker and… Jack Monroe (Nomad). Seriously, they’re on a date. They meet in an alley, beat up some threatening toughs, then head to see Rio Bravo together. All while Nomad is supposed to be delivering art to Steve Rogers.

Unfortunately, it’s a star crossed romance, with Taskmasker showing up to train a bunch of gangs to fight superheroes. So Spidey and Nomad have to break it up.

The writing is occasionally weak, but it’s some of the better stuff I’ve read from Burkett. While it’s a complete waste of time, it’s not terrible. Even LaRocque is stronger than usual–it’s mostly action this issue, so no heavy lifting.

There’s some funny forced continuity to the other Spider-Man books here. Peter’s taking a break from the alien costume trying to kill him for his date with Nomad.

The Amazing Spider-Man 258 (November 1984)

28104.jpg

I knew I liked these eighties Spider-Man issues. It just took DeFalco a while to bring it around (though it could all be the nostalgia talking).

What’s important about this issue isn’t the beginning, which cops out of the previous cliffhanger and then strangely sends Black Cat off to Neverland instead of resolving a new situation with her… but the end.

The majority of the issue is spent getting the black costume tested by Reed Richards and then taken off Spidey. There’s some funny stuff with the Torch–it’s amazing how much better DeFalco does when he’s writing Spider-Man around other superheroes instead of trying to handle his Peter Parker stuff–and a couple nice Ditko homages.

But the ending–Mary Jane shows up to talk to Peter. I didn’t think she would show up… figured DeFalco would draw it out.

He doesn’t and it’s a lovely move.