Stan Lee fue quien asentó las bases de los que se conoce Universo Marvel. Un guionista que tambien, todo hay que decirlo, estuvo muy bien acompañado por dibujantes de la talla de Jack Kirby y Steve Ditko entre otros. Es decir, se alaba el genio de Lee (algo innegable y a la vista estan sus creaciones) pero tambien habría que hacerlo de quienes daban vida a sus personajes (algún día hablaremos de Bob Kane -creador de Batman- y de como robaba las ideas de sus empleados, haciéndolas suyas).

Más de 40 años han seguido los Spider-man, Cuatro Fantásticos, Hulk, Thor, Los Vengadores, X-men y un sin fin de personajes que no harían si no llenar este post hasta casi el infinito, publicándose. Ahora su "universo" vive un momento álgido en cuanto adaptaciones cinematográficas, y Stan Lee no se pierde ni una de ellas.

En cada película Stan Lee ha tenido su consiguiente cameo. Y nada mejor que hacer un poco de memoria (tirando de Youtube) sobre ellos. No en vano sus intervenciones son rapidísimas y un ojo poco entrenado suele perdérselos. 

STAN LEE Y SUS CAMEOS

Fdo: Snake  

Steve Ditko doesn't really require a long, drawn-out introduction. So let's just say the following story is taken from Charlton Comics' The Thing #15, a pre-code comic that rivaled EC in originality and ... heh, heh, heh ... beautifully rendered gore.

The reason? A good number of the stories that ran during The Thing's two-year existence were drawn by the guy who co-created Spider-Man and wasn't named Stan Lee!

'Nuff said, true believer!

When an anonymous donor recently gave the Library of Congress Steve Ditko’s original artwork from the 1962 comic book “Amazing Fantasy #15,” the issue in which he created Spider-Man with the writer Stan Lee, barely anyone took notice. One of American comics’ great visual stylists, Ditko also had a hand in the development of both Iron Man and the Hulk, but his characters’ subsequent mass-media careers have made him neither rich nor particularly famous.

Let's stop right here. I have lots of Spiderman comics I read as a kid, but Spiderman has never been one of my all time favorite characters Steve Ditko has never been an influence on me, although I knew of him, of course, as part of American comic book history. It was only until recently I found out he was a fellow objectivist.

He drew his greatest work for a flat page rate; Lee, his collaborator, was the grinning public face of Marvel Comics, while Ditko has refused all interviews and public appearances for decades. The comics scholar Blake Bell’s overview of Ditko’s career, illustrated on nearly every page, is anecdotal and critical rather than strictly biographical. Bell didn’t have much of a choice: the endnotes reveal that he corresponded with Ditko for several years, but that in 2003 the cartoonist decided that both author and publisher were “anti-­Ditko” and repudiated them.

By the early ’60s, Ditko was doing his best work for Lee at Marvel, and the 40-odd Spider-Man stories he illustrated (and often plotted), built around images of frail, twisted bodies pirouetting through space, looked like no other comics before them. Neither did his magnificent tales of the “master of the mystic arts” Dr. Strange, avant-garde in every way except their unfailing narrative clarity — with a few squiggles, Ditko could evoke an alien dimension as surely as a Manhattan water tower.

He split with Lee and Marvel in 1966. By then, he’d fallen under the spell of Ayn Rand and Objectivism, and started producing an endless string of ham-fisted comics about how A is A and there is no gray area between good and evil and so on. “The Hawk and the Dove,” for instance, concerns two superhero brothers who … oh, you’ve already figured it out. Ditko could still devise brilliantly disturbing visuals — the Question, one of his many Objectivist mouthpieces, is a man in a jacket, tie and hat, with a blank expanse of flesh for a face — and his drawing style kept evolving, even as his stories tediously parroted “Atlas Shrugged” and “The Fountainhead” at the expense of character, plot and ultimately bearability.

Ah, so now we've reached the fundamental flaw with Superheros as a genre in the eyes of an objectivist. What this article neglects to mention is that the abiding code all objectivists live by is no force unless forced. A Superhero's main tool is force which they use at their own whim. Let's take a look at the classic Superhero stopping the bank robbery senario. Why that bank? Why those robbers? It comes down to a Superhero arbitrarily passing by said bank at whatever time of day and deciding to use their only tool, force, to stop those particular bank robbers. Force is the only method a superhero uses and they use it whenever they desire. Therefore a superhero is essentially a bully. These bank robbers never forced the Superhero into action. He just decided to take it. Because you have Super powers does that give you the right to impose your will on whomever you wish whenever you wish? I don't think so. There's no principle behind that. If they're principle is to stop crime then they'd have to stop all crime simultaneously all the time.

This is definitely quite the quandary for an objectivist who wants to draw comic books. It's one I faced after 2004 when I became an objectivist after reading Atlas Shrugged. but the solution to this problem is quite simple. Employment. There a six billion people in the world and they all live by one fundamental rule. If you labor for someone you should expect to be paid for your labors. If the bank were to employ the Superhero the Superhero would cease becoming a bully and then simply be doing their job.

This is economics. Economics runs the world and it should be taught to children and children read comic books.

By the ’70s he was regarded as a slightly old-fashioned oddball; by the ’80s he was a commercial has-been, picking up wretched work-for-hire gigs. Bell suggests that, following the example of Rand’s John Galt, Ditko hacked out money­making work, saving his care for the crabbed Objectivist screeds he published with tiny presses.

So what? Does Ditko owe the world or the comics community his best work? No. Ditko owes himself his best work and whatever he wants to apply his best work to, even if it is these "screeds". It's the comic book community's loss of they don't buy his small press work, and not his.

And boy, could Ditko hack: seeing samples of his Transformers coloring book and his Big Boy comic is like hearing Orson Welles sell frozen peas.

The portrait that emerges here is of an artist whose principles have ossified into bitter perversity. Bell relates stories of Ditko’s refusing to draw vampires because Objectivism rejects the super­natural; quitting a series because of a dispute over coloring production; and using a priceless old page of his original artwork as a cutting board. Ditko isn’t easy to love.

This is where differ with the way I precieve objectivisim with the way Ditko and other followers of Rand's philosophy do. Quite a few things are supernatural, if the definition of supernatural is unexplained, because there are a lot strange and unexplained things in the world. Every natural thing was supernatural until we understood it. Thunder, Lightning, The Sun rising in the morning. These all had supernatural explanations until we discovered the natural explanations for them. Bigfoot, Ghosts, Aliens, these are all things people have experienced. Their experience has been as real to them as a brick wall is to everyone. At present the experiences are supernatural. After they are studied and begin to be understood they will become natural. It is worth studying them and learning about them so that we can better understand the natural world around us. Can we say we know everything about nature? No. It would be limiting the mind to disregard a unexplained or supernatural occurance that we don't yet understand and to limit the mind would be anti-objectivisim because to limit the mind is limiting the ability and greatness of  human beings.

I don't know why Ditko refused to work on these projects. Only he knows. If it were me I would look at it as it being my job to tell a story, even if it were a fantastical story it would still be my job to tell the story. Breaking a contract is forcing the contractee into an awkward position and that too is anti-objectivist. It would have been better had Ditko never taken on these project in the first place.

A priceless old page of original art? Priceless to whom? Everything that can be traded has a price. A material good is only priceless to someone who can't achieve the same quality of work. To a collector this page may indeed be priceless because the collector can't match Ditko's skill at the drawing board. I wouldn't presume to speak for Ditko, but if it were my page it would be nothing to me. It would be meaningless. There are thousands upon thousands of infinitely better pages in the mind ready to be put to paper. Perhaps cutting this page may have even been a challenge to the witness. Did the witness precieve that this was the best piece of comic art ever created? If so then it should well be cut in front of their eyes as a lesson that if you think you have arrived at or seen the best then you have failed because there is always something better. Again, there is no limit yet known to the mind and thus no limit to a human being or their work.

As vivid as his work is, it’s never been pretty, and he’s never returned to his most famous creations for a victory lap or courted attention beyond acknowledgment of his work. The raw, nightmarish visions of his art are all he offers, and all he’s ever needed to offer.

What more needs to be offered? What does he owe anyone other than himself? He owes me nothing, but I owe him something for being a pioneer. He is fellow objectivist working in the cartooning field long before I was born and creating objectivist characters before I ever did. I never knew he created the Question, and now that I do I'm going to seek out his work especially work like The Question and study it and learn from it. Thank you Steve Ditko for breaking objectivism into comics. I hope to continue the legacy.

If you'd like to know more about Any Rand and Objectivisim here is the wikipedia entry.

If you'd like to know even more please read Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead.

Here' is another article on Steve Ditko and Objectivism.

Steve Ditko has no website.

I want to say thank you to Blake Bell for writing Strange and Stranger, and to Douglas Wolk for reviewing it.

Da Peter Bagge (Hate) tok for seg vår favorittvevslynger i The Megalomaniacal Spider-Man (på norsk i M), var superhelten forvandlet til en mørkeblå Ronald Reagan-fan, som etterlyste strengere domstoler for superskurker og hoppet av superheltkarusellen for å grådig toppsjef i det multinasjonale firmaet Spider-Man Inc.. Nå takket Spider-Man plutselig nei til veldedighetsarbeid for UNICEF, fordi han hatet FN.

De fleste Bagge- og Spider-Man-fans leste dette bare som en spinnvill parodi, men samtidig tok Bagge faktisk Spider-Man tilbake til sine røtter på samme vis som Frank Miller hentet frem den nattsvarte ånden i Batmans barndomsår i Batman: Year One. For Peter Parker har faktisk vært en konservativ jævel, og grunnen til det var tegneren Steve Ditko (80).

Studentprotest-protest
I 1966 hadde Spider-Man på fire år blitt en av USAs mest populære tegneserier, samtidig med at motstanden mot Vietnamkrigen eskalerte og motkulturene og protestbevegelsene blomstret. Men i nummer 38 av Amazing Spider-Man går en fnysende Peter Parker forbi en studentprotest. «Jeg har intet å protestere mot,» svarer han de pågående demonstrantene, som prøver å lokke ham inn i folden med å appellere til samvittigheten hans, samt samholdet, moroa og berømmelsen de kan tilby. «Dette er bare en unnskyldning for å skulke undervisningen,» raser Spider-Man, og rømmer unna demonstrantene før han blir voldelig og «gir dem noe de virkelig kan demonstrere mot».

I Peter Bagges parodi hadde Peter Parker forlest seg på den russisk-amerikanske forfatteren og filosofen Ayn Rand, og dette var slett ikke tatt ut av løse lufta – for i virkeligheten var det Ditko som hadde forlest seg på Rand. Hennes rabiate angrep på studentprotestene ble publisert noen måneder før Ditko leverte fra seg Peter Parkers eget oppgjør.

Rand var en mørkeblå tilhenger av løssluppen kapitalisme og rasjonell individualisme, og en iherdig motstander av sosialisme, altruisme og religion. Verden ble bedre hvis markedskreftene og individene fikk frie tøyler, og hun mistenkeliggjorde alle former for veldedighet og nestekjærlighet. Ditko hadde opplevd at både Spider-Man og Dr. Strange ble omfavnet av 1960-tallets motkulturelle ungdom, Dr. Strange hadde ur-hippier som Jefferson Airplane, Ken Kesey og Pink Floyd som fans. Dette forferdet den dypt konservative Ditko, som hatet sex, drugs & rock’n’roll, og var tilhenger av Ayn Rands objektivisme. Den mørkeblå filosofien preget mange av tegneseriene hans siden, og førte også til at han på sine eldre dager var mistenkelig overfor alle som ønsket å hjelpe ham – enten det var økonomisk eller i rettighetskampen mot Marvel.

Superhelt-pioner
Historien om Steve Ditko er typisk for de amerikanske superheltpionerene. Han skapte Spider-Man og Dr. Strange i samarbeid med Stan Lee, og frisket opp Hulk og Iron Man. Men i likhet med Jerry Siegel og Joe Shuster (Supermann), Bill Finger og Jerry Robinson (Batman) og Jack Kirby (Fantastic Four, X-Men med mer) satt han bare igjen med smuler etter millardindustrien han var med å starte opp.

Ditko tok sin hatt og forlot Marvel i 1966, og selv om han aldri nådde de samme høyder skapte flere minneverdige figurer siden. Hawk & Dove og The Creeper finnes fortsatt i randsonen av DC-universet, og The Question, Blue Beetle og Captain Atom var inspirasjonskildene for henholdsvis Rorschach, Nite Owl og Doctor Manhattan i Alan Moores Watchmen. Kultserien Shade the Changing Man var grunnlaget for en ny kultserie med samme navn, skrevet av Peter Milligan, på 1990-tallet.

Men Ditko klarte aldri å treffe tidsånden som på 1960-tallet igjen, og det sier sitt om hans manglende kontakt med ungdomskulturen når hans siste forsøk på en Marvel-superhelt på 1980-tallet, Speedball, tok samme navn som den dødelige miksen av heroin og kokain som tok livet av John Belushi, River Phoenix, Layne Staley i Alice In Chains og Hillel Slovak i Red Hot Chili Peppers.

Den ferske boken Strange and Stranger gir Steve Ditko kunstnerisk oppreisning. Han er fortsatt en særing som knapt viser seg offentlig, og tegneseriene hans de siste 20 årene har vært gigantiske flopper, uinspirert samlebåndsarbeid eller sære, personlige prosjekter trykket i mikroskopiske opplag. Men statusen hans har fått et oppsving, takket være økende nostalgi og kunnskap om Marvel-superheltenes barndomsår, for ikke å snakke om Spider-Mans popularitet i kjølvannet av Sam Raimis vellykkede filmatiseringer.

Boken gir et spennende innblikk i Ditkos karriere, men dessverre er forfatter Blake Bell til tider hakket for nærsynt. Han er mer opptatt av å greie ut om Ditkos tegneteknikker enn å sette karrieren i en bredere, kulturhistorisk sammenheng, og resultatet er mest givende for andre tegnere og harde Ditko-fans. Er du på jakt etter den fargerike historien bak USAs første superhelter, anbefales Gerard Jones’ strålende bok Men of Tomorrow på det varmeste.

Blake Bell
Strange and Stranger: The World of Steve Ditko
Fantagraphics Books
3/5

Opprinnelig publisert i Rocky nr. 4, 2008.

UNDER: De nådeløse superheltene The Question og Mr. A var et forbilde for Alan Moore da han skapte Rorschach i Watchmen.

I was thinking this morning that the two artists we've published of late with perhaps the most "heat" at the moment are Dash Shaw and Steve Ditko. Which then reminded me of Dash's unpublished Dr. Strange strip (see below), and inevitably led me to one conclusion: that really, Marvel Comics should give Dr. Strange to Fantagraphics. Marvel doesn't know what the fuck to do with him. Give him to us and we'll start an ongoing Dr. Strange anthology with new work by Los Bros, Dash Shaw, Daniel Clowes, Kim Deitch, and other longtime Ditko fans, and include reprints of the classic Ditko Strange as well. Joe Quesada, it is your moral duty to make this happen.

Or, y'know, they could give him to Ditko.

Prendete un fumetto di Spider Man - sì, quello di Stan Lee e Steve Ditko - e mettetelo in un frullatore con 20 e passa anni di cinema italiano di genere. Cosa otterrete? Ma "Italian Spiderman Movie" ovviamente! Ovvero un allupatissimo e maschilista supereroe con diversi chili di troppo, dei bei baffi neri, capelli unti, una sigaretta accesa perfino nelle scene d'azione (marca Il Gallo) ed un assortimento variegato di superpoteri (dalla smaterializzazione al controllo psichico di una gallina). A proporci questa piccola perla di non-cinema, disponibile per il momento in visione gratuita su YouTube e sui vari siti ufficiali, è la Alrugo Entertainment (http://alrugo.com/): Alrugo is dedicated to making films that make you feel good about wasting your time watching them. Secondo quanto narrato, "Italian Spiderman Movie" è stato girato tra il 1964 ed il 1968, ma il produttore (Alfonso Alrugo, coltivatore di arance...) non aveva fondi a sufficienza per portarlo nelle sale e quindi ne inviò la sola copia disponibile a un distributore americano. Sfortunatamente la nave che trasportava il prezioso capolavoro affondò e il film venne inghiottito dalle acque, in punto di morte Alfonso pregò però i suoi due nipoti Vivaldi e Verdi Alrugo di recuperare la pellicola e i due, dopo quattro anni di duro lavoro, riuscirono nell'impresa. La Part 1 di "Italian Spiderman Movie" arriva così sugli schermi dei nostri PC in dieci episodi da quattro/cinque minuti l'uno, Gianfranco Gatti dirige Franco Franchetti (sic) in una parodia che bada poco o niente al fumetto di cui sopra e men che meno al ragno di Sam Raimi, ma fa man bassa di generi: spionaggio, fantascienza, campi e controcampi western, un pizzico di splatter ultra-amatoriale, la commedia scollacciata e qualche effetto pop/psichedelico che forse, al più, sua maestà Mario Bava... Esilarante l'idea di costruire i dialoghi partendo da una traduzione quasi letterale dei sottotitoli in inglese, lo stesso doppiaggio è improbabile e raggiunge vette ineguagliabili nelle battute chiave di Italian Spiderman: Jesus Christ, shut your mouth pussycat make me a macchiato...pronto! e respect women. In questa Part 1 la storia gira attorno ad un misterioso asteroide raccolto dall'eminente Professor Bernardi (dotato di nipote mega gnocca), il quale riesce ad elaborare una formula i cui effetti sono a dir poco stupefacenti; ma il malvagio Capitano Maximum (Leombruno Tosca), acerrimo nemico di Italian Spiderman vestito come un lottatore di wrestling sudamericano, vuole impadronirsi a tutti i costi del miracoloso composto. Detta così, potrebbe sembrare la solita iutubata girata da quattro amici per farsi due risate, invece non è così. Alla trama palesemente e volutamente idiota di "Italian Spiderman Movie" segue infatti una realizzazione a suo modo curata e soprattutto molto divertente, la riesumazione del cinema italiano dei '70 e dintorni è efficace nelle intuizioni, negli abbigliamenti, nelle varie tecniche di montaggio e, in particolare, nelle musiche, che mischiano Funk, Morricone, library e colonne sonore simil-giapponesi. In una parola: vintage. Non a caso Soulful Torino Records e Record Kicks (http://www.recordkicks.net/catalog/) hanno già messo in commercio l'edizione limitata su 45 giri di "Italian Spiderman"/"Bangarang", composto da Enzo Bontempi, in più sono disponibili l'immancabile t-shirt ufficiale e perfino uno dei gioielli presenti in una sequenza del film. Di seguito, in attesa della Part 2 (toccherà al verde Goblin del trailer?), vi lasciamo tutti i primi 10 episodi di "Italian Spiderman Movie".

Antonio Bra Smiraglia

Here you go world. I've got questions.

Initially I was planning on doing this in color but it seemed more fitting to leave him in BLACK and WHITE.

So without further ado.....
Unfinished Sketch Montage Number 1

Went down to the Library of Congress today to look at Steve Ditko's original artwork from Amazing Fantasy No. 15 -- which y'all know was the first appearance of Spider-Man, right?

Awesome. The original artwork -- donated anonymously to the LoC about a month ago. For Spider-Man and the three other stories, also penned by Stan Lee and drawn by Steve Ditko, that comprised the issue. It would take seven months after the publication of this, final issue of Amazing Fantasty (nee Amazing Adult Fantasy) for Spidey to get his own title. Forty-six years later, he's still going strong.

I'll have a story about it in the paper next weekend.

I'll not mince words, I'm a big Mary Jane fan. She is the person most meant for Peter Parker. I know I'll hear it from the Gwen fans out there, but that's okay. No one's been there more for Peter than MJ, and do I hope that we'll eventually see the return of their marriage.

With that out of the way, I've got a strong suspicion that Amazing Spider-Man #559 sets the stage for Mary Jane's return. The pretext for her return will most likely be linked to Peter's new gig as paparazzi photographer for the Daily Bugle - a job he comes into with this issue. The job's trashy, despicable, and shady - Peter knows this, but he also knows that his talents are perfect in this arena, and the money's too good to pass up. With Peter stalking a high profile male celebrity, it's almost too predictable that he'll cross paths with MJ when it's revealed that she's dating said celebrity. But whatever, if it comes to that then so be it. Just bring her back already!

As for the rest of this issue, it's incredibly strong. Dan Slott returns to the book again with a new story arc and artist (Marcos Martin) in tow. Slott does a brilliant job of packing the pages with story - moving the plot faster than perhaps the last two or three story arcs combined! We're also introduced to two new female villains: Screwball and Paper Doll.

Like The Freak, Screwball is an interesting concept that just doesn't work. She's a woman with incredible agility who broadcasts her crime capers via live streaming on the Internet. This idea fails on several levels because it relies too much on defying realism. A girl this gifted - I don't care who she is - should not be able to best Spider-Man in any way. Spidey's got too much experience and tricks under his belt to be shaken up by a newbie. Also, why her idiotic accomplices aren't arrested or pursued makes no sense. It just doesn't work. Yes, I know I said this issue was strong, so why am I complaining? Because as stupid as the idea is, it still managed to entertain on some level. I'll just admit it, Dan Slott knows how to make a bad concept seem fun.

As for Paper Doll, she is the complete opposite of Screwball. In fact, this villain seems more suited to Runaways than a Spidey book. She's creepy, brooding, and supernatural. As odd of a fit she as she is to this title, of all the new Brand New Day villains introduced thus far, I think she's got most potential. Slott and the other Spider-Man writers just need to keep her mysterious and twisted for as long as they can. I'm really digging this character.

Lastly, the art. Marcos Martin's work here is unrivaled. It's the best art we've seen since Brand New Day started - and yes, it's better than Chris Bachalo and Steve McNiven's stuff. Martin's style may not appeal to everyone, but his storytelling, his action, and his panel work are out of this world. Dan Slott said Marcos Martin's style is a cross between Steve Ditko and Tim Sale, and he's absolutely right. This issue is outrageously gorgeous and a technical wonder to behold.

Despite my misgivings with some of the story elements, these imperfections ultimately end up as the contributing factors that make this issue so damn fun. Oh, and the Starbrand Coffee ad is a nice easter egg. Give me more, I say! (Grade: A-)

- J. Montes

Fans of Babylon 5 were excited to hear, in early 2001, that J. Michael Straczynski would be taking over the writing duties for Amazing Spider-man, the flagship title for Marvel's flagship character. I didn't particularly care. It was Spider-man, and I was pretty sure it was impossible to screw up the character beyond help - Howard Mackie had just recovered from the dreaded clone saga. And, let's be honest, nothing that bad could ever happen again, right?

Could it?

J. Michael Straczynski, or JMS as I will call him from here on out, is a pretty good writer. I will admit that. He did great stuff with Babylon 5, I guess. But some people shouldn't touch some characters, and JMS and Spider-man was a disaster.

Around 2000, Marvel was still using Spider-man to tell stories. Believe it or not, Marvel used to be about storytelling. But all the while, Spider-man was uniquely relateable to the character he had been when Romita or Ditko had been working on him. Howard Mackie's Spider-man was the embodiment of this. He was witty, he took pictures for the Bugle, he battled Green Goblin, and he lived in May's house, with Mary Jane, the love of his life. 

 What was truly great about Mackie's run was the way he was able to keep the running theme of Spidey's books - first It giveth, then it taketh away - and let it play with Spidey's sense of responsibility in new and interesting ways. During "Identity crisis," Spidey was essentially barred from being Spider-man by the law, as he was wanted for a crime he didn't commit. So, he came up with a few new costumes, and some new identities.

Spider-man from 1998 to 200 was a testament to the triumph of the average person. Everyday people living everyday lives did extraordinary things in the Spider-man books during this time period.

The run came to an end following Mary Jane being recovered from a kidnapping, and, subsequently separating from Peter. The story oozed editorial mandate, and his run ended on an incredibly low note, which seems to be a running theme.

Briefly afterwards, they handed Spider-man to JMS, who, after a few years of sagging sales, "needed to be saved." Wizard magazine wrote articles about how JMS had reminded us Spider-man was "the coolest character in comics." This did, of course, coincide with a blockbuster movie franchise taking root, but it was widely accepted JMS had more to do with it.

His first books focused around a concept he called the "spider-totem." JMS constructed a story in which the spider, whose power-giving ability stemmed not from radiation, chose Peter to carry on the totem. The radiation killed the spider, which chose Peter because it sensed his understanding of power and responsibility.

Notice simply that Spider-man is then no longer an everyday person. He is chosen by the powers that be to maintain an amazing gift. Notice there was no editorial mandate there.

JMS took a lot of time dealing with Aunt May and Mary Jane. He saw them as the quintessential supporting characters for Spidey - the two that cause Spidey to keep going, his moral compass; his sense of responsibility stemmed from these two women, and we see that in the way the characters interacted in JMS' work.

JMS distorted these relationships, particularly the one Peter had with Aunt May - he had Peter have to tell her his fricking identity. That's no editorial mandate.

Unfortunately, he also did some really silly stuff. Spider-man got really, really serious as soon as JMS took it over. The snark Spidey was famous for left almost completely rather quickly. For awhile, the only place to get his snark was New Avengers, since Bendis was writing it. (For the record, Bendis should just write every Marvel book. And he could. He's basically the new Stan Lee.) Dialogue by JMS hurt to read. He attacked everything from some forced perspective he viewed as unique, in a way the character didn't stretch far enough to allow.

And then there was a lot of other stupid stuff that JMS tried to do. For instance, he decided to retcon the relationship between Gwen Stacey and Norman Osborn, so that they had had an affair in Paris resulting in goblin-children, who thought their father was Peter Parker and tried to kill him.

Note: See the comments for more on this arc, titled "Sins of the Past"

Overall, the tone shifted in Amazing Spider-man, and it turned out to be for the worse. Marvel lost sight of the character. They tried doing things like having him demask. They forgot what the core of the character had been in the Romita days, or the days of Ditko. It wasn't light anymore. Spider-man would do things like stop to pray. Aunt May found out about Peter's double life. They even fucking killed him once.

Now, they want to make the book lighter. Peter blunders occasionally. The dialogue is a bit funnier. And JMS doesn't really have much say in what's going on. They've basically forced the character out of his hands. Brand New Day is good for one thing - the last seven years of spidey stories are gone. Seven years after JMS came into Marvel swinging, they undid everything he'd done.

First It giveth.

This issue introduced both a villain and a compatriot to Spider-Man in the dual identity of Connors (who later moved to New York City to pursue his career as a chemist) and the Lizard (who continued to terrorize the Big Apple). In the more recent iterations of Spider-Man Connors has been introduced as a scientist first and a monster second in order to build a connection between Connors and Parker.

Rumored to be a major player in the fourth Spider-Man film, The Lizard is a horrific character as well as a sympathetic one. Spider-Man is constantly trying to stop him, but his main goal is to return the beast to the form of the mild-mannered brilliant scientist. This was typical of the 1960's Marvel Comics school where 'something different' was introduced to replace the tired old mustache-twirling mad scientist.

The new episode of Spider-Man premieres this Saturday at 10 AM ET/PT.

a) "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times..."

b) "It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to than I have ever known."

c) "Repression is the only lasting philosophy. The dark deference of fear and slavery, my friend...will keep the dogs obedient to the whip, as long as this roof...shuts out the sky."

d) "This really is a tale of two titties."

2. Which of the following powers does Spider-Man possess?

a) clings to walls

b) superhuman strength

c) spider-sense

d) attractive to mentally challenged women

3. In The Master and Margarita, which of the following did Homeless not do to make money?

a) Write poetry

b) Beg on the street

c) Work at the Gap

d) Donate sperm

If you didn't answer D-D-C, you need to come see Sporknotes and get schooled.

Ted Kord, The Silver-Age Blue Beetle.

Nowadays, the DC hive-mind has chosen to portray Kord as a lovable - but somewhat incompetent - hero who uncovered the OMAC conspiracy and paid the ultimate price.

That's all well and good, but we'll always prefer creator Steve Ditko's version of the character, who lept about and kicked criminal @$$ as effectively as a certain friendly neighborhood arachnid.

Hey, the Charlton Blue Beetle even teamed up with Vic Sage to defend Objectivist principles against The Destroyer Of Heroes!

Incompetent? Ted Kord sounds more like your classic smilin' two-fisted hero to us.

Hopefully, Bahlactus will agree ...

2 stars

Gone Baby Gone, directed by Ben Affleck, is another in a long line of potboiler detective stories that make it to the screen. This one just happens to have a great cast performing at a high level and a freshman directorial effort that has everyone talking.
What I liked: Performances. When you get Ed Harris and Morgan Freeman in a movie you are moving in the right direction, The word on the street (did I just write that?) was that Amy Ryan and Casey Affleck are great in the movie and for once the street is right. Ryan in particular is believable as the unfit mother. Casey portrays some nuance that is rare in the lead of a detective story like this. Based on the Dennis Lehane novel of the same name, Ben Affleck captures the people and mood of the neighborhoods where the story unfolds. This level of detail elevates a story that is more typical than I would usually like.
What I didn't like: While Ben Affleck is doing an excellent job and weaving the plot elements together in a way that unifies the film, I think that as it inches towards the climax the film's visual style goes limp. There are too many matching singles or single/OTS sequences with long speeches. Perhaps the novel has these talky scenes at the end, but it makes for a weaker ending. That being said, I liked the movie a lot and it was close to adding a star.

3 stars

The Brave One, directed by Neil Jordan, the Jodi Foster vehicle/revenge drama about a woman whose fiance is killed when they are both beaten while walking their dog. Foster does what any movie heroine would do, she gets a gun and becomes a vigilante, eventually tracking down the men that ruined her life.
What I liked: Very little. Foster is doing her best to pump some life into this character and the idea behind a woman whose radio show "Street Walker" is about loving New York City, fearing that same city after her life is turned upside down, is the stuff of high drama. I like high drama. But only when it's well done.
The cinematography was good, so that's something.
What I didn't like: This was a movie that was forced and akward in many respects. Neil Jordan, a director I like, fails to keep the momentum in the film. The scenes between Foster and Terrance Howard should be tense and stood out as a moment for the actors and filmmakers to shine. The scenes fall flat. As an audience member I cared about Foster's character up to a point but the film was too interested in her sitting in her apartment and smoking and less interested in making me care about her. Every time I began to get into the character we cut to a scene with Howard's character chasing the case. His character was the uninteresting center of what failed in this movie. This movie should have been a character study and instead it felt like it was trying to blend character study with procedural. It was a bland mixture and not a movie I would recommend.

2 stars

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Rating:

Spider-Man 2 Plot Summary In A Sentence:                

Peter Parker (Spider-Man), faced with the demands of school, work, his love interest Mary Jane, and super-villain Dr. Octopus, debates and decides what battles he will stop fighting and what battles he will continue to fight.

The Morals of the Story:                                             

If your ordinary life is not meeting all your aspirations and your community's needs, you can consider creating an alter ego to pursue those goals.

Anyone doing any worthwhile activity is at regular risk of failure.  (Peter Parker at his job, at school, with his girlfriend, and saving the world)

Your talents and powers are not simply a list of aptitudes.  The level of you skills and abilities are in large part dependent on your choices to remain skilled and to use your skills for purposes you genuinely support. (Spider-Man losing his web-shooter and wall-clinging abilities as he doubts his choices and reasoning)

When your friends disappoint you, give them a chance to explain before judging them.  (Peter not attending Mary Jane's play as promised because he is being a super-hero to someone else)

If your loves ever pressure you to stop helping others, listen to their advice, but don't turn a blind eye to helping those in need.

It is better to be poor and honorable, than to be rich and dishonorable.

Brilliance should not be coupled with laziness.

Intelligence is a privilege, not a gift, and you have to use it for the good of mankind.

Aspire to find a "Life's work."  If you're going to choose a "life's work," it should be a worthy one.

"Love should never be a secret.  If you leave something as complicated as love stored inside, it can make you sick."

When you are deciding what to do, give more consideration to your actions that help the others the most.

If you expect someone will let you down, you're more likely to interpret their actions incorrectly.

Your father's successes and failures may help or harm you.  But they are not your successes and failures and you will define your own successes and failures.

Your failures alone will not determine your pursuits or your abilities as much as your sense of purpose.

You always have a choice whether to pursue moral actions.

With great power comes great responsibility.

Ordinary men can become super-heroes by the quality of their actions.

No matter how good a path you choose, some of the people close to you will still be disappointed in your choice.

If you can't make the love or your life happy, might as well work to make everyone else happy.

If you see someone in imminent need of help, and you don't provide aid, you are not a hero.  Further, you are immoral.

If you do something wrong that hurts someone you love, admit your mistakes.  (Peter admitting he let the man escape who killed Uncle Ben)

Sometimes you get harmed or killed for doing the right thing.  (Uncle Ben fighting off the carjackers)

There are beautiful things very close to you that you have never recognized.  (The supervisor's daughter living next door to Peter)

Forgive others when they admit their mistakes, show true remorse, and commit to not repeating the same mistakes.

Everyone is a role model, whether they wish to set a good example or not.

There is the potential for a hero in all of us.

Some heroes give up pursuing their own dreams to help facilitate others' dreams.

Our abilities are improved by a strong focus on what we want.

Spider-man is just a kid who chooses to get involved in solving other people's problems.

It's important to remember there are always bigger problems than what you are concerned about in your immediate world.

You will not be able to solve all your problems through use of force.  In order to solve some problems, you will have to learn to persuade your enemies to change.  (Spider-man convinding Dr. Octavius in the end to stop his pursuit of a controlled fusion reaction)

"Sometimes, to do what's right, we have to be steady and give up the thing we want the most . . . even our dreams." - Spider-Man

No matter what wrong we have done, we can change.  We can all choose to not die a monster.  (Dr. Octavius)

Humorous Highlights:                                                 

When introducing new fusion technologies, maybe demostrate them in a car fuel cell or long-lasting battery instead of a 4-armed robot that must attach to your spinal cord in order to work.

When designing an "inhibitor chip" to subdue an artificially intelligent robot attached to your neck, protect it with more than just a tiny blue glass chip in reach of the robot's arms.

Clichés and Assumptions The Story Challenged:         

Super-hero movies are immature morality tales.

A Question For You Is:                                               

What other moral, humorous, or innovative ideas did you find in this story?

Spider-Man 2 on IMDb 

Spider-Man 2 on Wikipedia

- - - -

Home

Make no mistake, I'm a huge fan of David Lapham's body of work - especially his earlier Valiant work. The Batman story he did a couple of years ago? It was pretty good. His Terror Inc. mini-series is fun. And being that Spidey's my favorite character, I was really anticipating this storyline.

Alas, Spider-Man: With Great Power reminds me of something John Byrne did about a decade ago with Spider-Man: Chapter One. Honestly, who's idea was this? How many times must we read a different take on Spider-Man's origin. The fact that this story takes place now (with pop culture references to Jay Leno and Dave Letterman), makes this story more dismissible. Yes, it's the classic story of Peter Parker and Lapham doesn't miss a beat on who he is and what happens to him - but it's all just a retread. Sure, Lapham adds some new story bits with Flash Thompson, Liz Allen, and Peter's wrestling career, but because this story isn't true Spider-Man canon, it's completely useless.

There is one thing that shines in this book, however: the art. I'm not sure if I've seen Tony Harris' art before, but good lord, this guy can draw. No, really, this guy can really draw! J.D. Mettler also adds a lot of depth with his colors; this is one beautiful book!

I suppose if you're new to Spider-Man or new to reading comics, this could be a nice introduction to the character, but it just feels like another origin story forced down our throat. I mean, didn't we just get Mythos: Spider-Man last June (yet another re-telling of Amazing Spider-Man #15)?

The biggest insult is that this book is $3.99! Who decides this stuff?! I'm sorry, despite the gorgeous art, I can't recommend this book. We've read this story too many times. It's time for something new. (Grade: C-)

- J.Montes

E todos estão lá: Abutre, Dr. Octopus, Lagarto, Electro, Homem-Areia, tia May, J. Jonah Jameson, Betty Brant, Flash Thompson e, claro, Peter Parker - o amargurado e carismático jovem prodígio, que aprendeu a duras penas que com grandes poderes vêm grandes responsabilidades. Tiragem limitada!

(Amazing Fantasy 15, Amazing Spider-Man 1-10)
Edição especial, formato americano, capa dura, 252 páginas, R$ 57,00, papel LWC, distribuição para comic shops e livrarias.

Biblioteca Histórica Marvel: Homem-Aranha 1

But it still left me with many questions.

Who created the Sandman? Some unknown scientists doing unknown experiments in some shady unknown location? Why did they vanish the next morning, never to return?

The scientists didn't even bother checking their radioactive sandbox. Otherwise they would've seen the Sandman tumble right in.

I really like the scene in which the Sandman rises for the first time—very impressive! But also a missed opportunity. There could have been a more realistic atmosphere with the Sandman, being in the middle of a top secret science lab. Like when Doc Ock came alive, slaughtering those doctors who operated on him—great scene!

Also, why did Pete Parker have to be so unlikable throughout the entire movie? No character arc. He was self-centered before and after donning the black suit.

Speaking of the black suit creature . . . odd how it feels "plopped" into the movie. No real interaction with the main characters. Or any characters for that matter. It seems more like a stray, shy puppy that nobody cares to bother with. I was hoping for a little more acknowledgement. Like, hey, there's a brand new creature in town, people, so watch out!

Would've brought greater tension and drive to the story, don't you think?

Want more alternate versions of Spider-Man 3? Check this out:

(Be sure to read my alternate opening sequence for Spider-Man 3. It used to be part of this post, but I decided to keep it separate.)

Just look at that cover!  I know, the comic is in terrible shape, but it's freakin' Incredible Hulk #6!  At a time when artists and writers didn't even put their names on the cover!  Little did they know then that they would become legends.  Kirby's style created the look and excitement to almost every flagship character for Marvel.  Stan Lee wrote stories that could grip the minds of young children all over the country.  And let's not forget Steve Ditko (who penciled this issue) who was essential in bringing Kirby's pencil's to the forefront.  Is the language a little hokey now?  Sure, but who cares!  The Incredible Hulk character was already 14 when I was born and had already lived through cancellation, re-coloring, and reclaiming his own title again! 

 Every issue of the original first 6 had a new exciting change to the Hulk persona.  In this issue, you meet the Metal Master and  you also see the Teen Brigade which teen Rick Jones founded, and Bruce Banner and Betty Ross' tumultuous relationship has it's first big hurdle - Thunderbolt Ross finding out! 

Any Hulk fan should try to get any of the first 6 issues.  They are as important as they are works of art and amazing to see in person.  My copies aren't the best - but it is all I can afford right now and I'm just excited to get any of them at all!  And the older they get the more expensive they will be.  These are rare, and I don't mean "rare" like retailers mean it today, saying something's rare just to try to sell a book, I mean, these books didn't have a big initial printing in the first place so getting any copy now is hard - unless you have the cash.