The original comics by stanlee

[groovyhippy]

What do you have to say about the origanals?

[shinlyle]

honestly, they are classics. they are what started the whole shebang. they were genius for their time and should never be treated as less than that. i've read a few ot them, and they're great.
if you mean " vs, today's comics", then it gets a bit tricky. i mean, it's hard to relate to stories that are set back in the sixties and seventies. the art wasn't as flashy, and the dramatics of visual storytelling have improved greatly nowadays, so you have a tough sell to the younger crowd. i appreciate the older stories, and i even like them a great deal, but to younger readers, they're just "old". and kids nowadays don't even know who steve ditko is, let alone do they want to read a comic that was around when their parents were kids. y'know?

[Kadosho]

Its something how it started out as a simple idea,then became a hit.From time to time alot of today's comic writer's & artists look back at what their forefathers brought to the pages of yesteryear. But nowadays its not easy to say something is hard hitting. Especially how far Spidey has gone,and celebrating a special ASM#500! And many more years to come...

[web-head_S939]

Originally posted by shinlyle
honestly, they are classics. they are what started the whole shebang. they were genius for their time and should never be treated as less than that. i've read a few ot them, and they're great.
if you mean " vs, today's comics", then it gets a bit tricky. i mean, it's hard to relate to stories that are set back in the sixties and seventies. the art wasn't as flashy, and the dramatics of visual storytelling have improved greatly nowadays, so you have a tough sell to the younger crowd. i appreciate the older stories, and i even like them a great deal, but to younger readers, they're just "old". and kids nowadays don't even know who steve ditko is, let alone do they want to read a comic that was around when their parents were kids. y'know? nah! not all of us. im 14 and i would do anything to get my hands on some of the 60's and 70's comix. :eek: :eek:

[thelizrd17]

Perfect!

[Fancydan59]

Stan Lee, for all his in person kidding around and schtick.........was a genius! Just ask any of the top comic writers that are around today.

Stan, along with Jack Kirby, Steve Ditko, and John Romita Sr. basically broke the molds and created new and exciting heros and villians that have lasted for decades, and are gaining steam to last many, many more.

[shinlyle]

gob bless you, web-head_s939! it's rare you ever hear the younger fans wanting the older comics for anyhting other than their monetary value. you are truly a rare breed. maybe we'll see the emergence of more comic fans like you.

[web-head_S939]

thanks! i hope so too! :)

[UnitedCreation1]

> Stan...basically broke the molds and
> created new and exciting heros and
> villians that have lasted for
> decades, and are gaining steam to
> last many, many more

I have re-prints of the first 20 Amazing Spider-Man comics and I've read through about 5 of them so far and I find it hard to believe you.

However, I am definitely not a comic book buff by any stretch of the imagination so I was wondering if you could give me some reason to believe that Stan and the crew "created new and exciting heros and villains." I mean, obviously Spider-Man is awesome, but I'm referring to say, Dr. Doom, or The Enforcers, or any of the other villains. They seem corny and generic, no?

Of course, anyone else who has input jump in too. I'm just curious and wondering about this.

Talk to you guys later! See ya.

--Patrick, 19, CT, USA
AIM Screenname: patrickc284

[Fancydan59]

I'm not saying that ALL of Stan's rouges gallery were created equal. But most of them are still used in comics today.........as a matter of fact every one of them you mentioned!

Some of them may have been a bit corny.......but GENERIC???? Come on! You obviously haven't done much comicbook reading over the course of your lifetime! If anything, Spidey's villians were anything but generic.......most of them were / are quite unique.

I mean, give my another example to compare too with Doctor Octopus, the Green Goblin, Mysterio, Sandman, the Molten Man, Vulture, Kraven the Hunter, Electro, the Lizard, Scorpion, etc, etc, etc.

Oh yeah, and Doctor Doom was not only the biggest arch nemesis in the Fantastic Four's comics.........he was so corny and generic that he inspired George Lucas to create a little boring character by the name of Darth Vader.

Maybe the good Dr. will seem a bit more interesting after his own big screen appearance in the Fantastic Four movie in 2005! ;)

[tman]

Stan Lee is great because he dealt with issues besides just writing comics. In Spider-man he dealt with many most mentioned is drug abuse of which he used Harry Osborn to address, and had a lot of critics say he should not have done it including his bosses at Marvel. He created the X-men you can not miss those comics dealing with racism. Daredevil is a blind man, but you could not hang a disabled label on him very easily.

If you have only read 20 early issues, you should read more. They are great entertainment, but in the issues they dealt with some serious subjects, his characters were relatable. I could think of someone, or myself in some ways as I read the stories.

Above are a few of the many reasons Stan Lee is called Stan 'The Man' Lee.

[fred10]

Remember when reading them that not only was our hero young, but Stan was young, also. He was definately not in the prime of his writing ability. That came later. These early issues of Spider-man were set at a faster pace than later issues, and for good reason. The question of whether the book would continue was always a looming spectre, so they had to hit fast and hard. Peter's high school years whizzed by, progressing almost in real time. The rogue's gallery was introduced at a break neck speed, without much character development, as well as some of the main players in Peter's life.

I have mentioned this in another post somewhere: what "is" Peter Parker and what "isn't". These early issues seem more like an artists representation of what might have happened to Spider-man in his early years. Think of Stan as a news reporter (similar, perhaps, to Ben Urich writing his personal memoirs of Matt Murdock) who has taken a special interest in Spider-man, but who didn't develop a personal relationship with him until Pete's college years. It was at this time that the character started coming through clearly and had been developed to such a degree that he would take on a life of his own. By this time, also, Stan had really matured as a writer and was producing some powerful stuff -- such as Harry's aforementioned drug problems. His dialogue for Randy was amazing. He became more in depth with all the characters and began reintroducing the old rogues gallery with more depth, as well.

It makes sense that it should happen this way. When things begin, it's hard to put a finger on how or why they began, they just happen; and sometimes they happen very quickly without much room for introspection or analysis. There's usually no one around to take notes for these unannounced, seminal events. It isn't until later that things start to make more sense. Hindsight is, as they say, 20/20.

By the cenntenial issue of ASM, Spider-man had really come to life and Stan Lee had come into his own as a writer. I like to think of those early issues as being more documentative briefs of early, major, defining events. If the dialogue wasn't all there, that's fine. I mean, who knows what was actually said between Spider-man and his enemies and his closest friends? At this point it was all second hand information. Stan didn't know Spider-man personally -- yet.

Peter probably wouldn't be able to tell you exactly what happened in those early years, either. What matters is that those things happened and those are the people he met, influenced, and was influenced by. We get to know these characters better, later on, after Spider-man has become better known and Stan has taken a greater interest in him. At this point Stan's writing becomes more biographical, story arcs take longer, the pace of the comic slows down, and the character he writes about "is" Peter Parker, not some subjective characterization puzzled together from real events.

[calculator2006]

I like the old comics,(Amazing Spider-man is my favorite)and I like most of the stories that they have done. (One of the few stories I didn't like was the Clone Saga)
As for the new comics, Amazing Spider-man Vol.2 is ok(they could do better on the story), but Ultimate Spider-man is my favorite current comic book.

[web-head_S939]

I love the original Amazing Spider-Man comics. All the others (except Ultimate Spider-Man) just don't make sense. Most of them anyway.

[tman]

Amazing Spider-man is still the mainstay for me. I enjoy that Aunt May discovered Peter was Spider-man, and can put the issue where she writes the cancellation to the Bugle and subscription to other paper in my all time favorites. The totemistic connection to Peter's powers is very interesting, I am nervous and excited about where the series is going.

[Redarachnid]

Awesome. totally *****ing awesome.

[qweet35]

i'm also 14, and all i like to read are the old 60's and 70's comics ( i own about 40 of them). the new ones are good, but nothing will ever be as good as the origionals. if you ask me, the new ones are taking after the movie too much, some people don't even know the origional story. don't get me wrong, the movie is my favorite movie in the world, but they did change a few things.

[webslingerj]

The writing of SpiderMan has been an epic task. We have had the opportunity to witness the maturation of a young superhero. Although unintentional, perhaps, the missteps in writing and story perfectly parallel the growing pains associated with youth. I remember being 17. It seemed as though I could never do anything right. SpiderMan has come to embody all that makes us human. Purity of human character is something we often fail to perfectly emulate.

The early stories were far from perfect. But that is what makes them so good. Because so are we all. It is fitting that there should be mistakes. Spidey is the Good Samaritan of superheroes. He reminds us that if it is within our power to do good we should do so. That message rings out clearly.

[spider-jide]

I'm 18 yrs old and have been reading spider-man since i was 7. I watched the 60's cartoons, the 90's cartoons (even that both up spidey unlimited cartoon) watched the 70's theatrical series starring Nicholas Hammond.In as much as i love and read the core titles of spidey including Ultimate spider-man i still think that the older comics are the best and i'm talking about the 60's through to the early 90's. The stories were more consistent as well as the art work and it just feels more right. I cant explain it properly but... in todays stories most of the stories are all the same and they have taken peter's problems to another level,taking the pi$$ along with it. Yeah peter has bad luck and all that, thats what makes him him, but when you have a character taht is clever, has good qulifications and he's out sleeping in doorways and cant get a decent job and is washing dishes for a living that is taking the pi$$. I think i'm right in saying that the guy who wrote just before j.michael strazynsk did not know the difference between telling a story about a guy who has bad luck and a guy who is simply a failure because that was the impression he gave, he made peter a failure when he wasn't. Things have much improved since then but i stil think the old comics are better and by far more enjoyable to read because the stories varied but were consistent, made more sense and were and still is in a high class of its own. BTW does anybody know what hapened to the jury? (those guys who were supposed to take out venom and the started giving spidey grief). The fact is the older comics are the best and i thank Raimi because the first spidey film had that old classic feel to it and it looks as though the same is going to be done with spidey 2 with doc ock.