Where would you rate Micheline/McFarlane ASM Run...

[Prince Namor]

Most everyone who jumped on during the McFarlane years will remember it as good.

Compared to now, maybe it is. Haven't read it in years.

 

Those of us who collected Spidey through the Romita/Andru years and went back and got those Ditko issues, will generally see the McFarlane run as:

A) The beginning of the end

B) Lacking fluid storytelling after the Stern/DeFalco run

C) Collected it for the art, because it WAS kinda neat

or, my choice:

D) All of the above

 

 

Spidey was hideous for much of the 70's and early 80's. Same ol' same ol' was the name of the day. Consider: the only characters that "stuck" from #100-#237 were Morbius, Punisher, and Black Cat...and even those characters languished for years.

 

Issue #238 started something new, and #238 to #261 are excellent, for the most part.

 

But #100-#237 is filled with forgettable nonsense. I mean, really, how many times does Doc Ock need to fall for Aunt May?

 

The McFarlane run was not high literature, but it was FUN. It was exciting. Mich and Mac clearly enjoyed their work, and it shows. Sure, AssassiNation Plot was weak, but Venom, Green Goblin vs. Hobby, Silver Sable, Scorpion, Lizard, Mysterio, Sandman, Black Cat...the run was just FUN.

 

And come on, watching Mary Jane Watson-Parker chop up her possessed gold jewelry was HI-LARIOUS.

 

 

 

I think you're discounting some stories from the 100's to the 149's, but I know exactly what you're saying. Spidey and Marvel altogether got very stagnant and repetitive during that time.

[Ken Aldred]

In the 80s I looked forward to McFarlane's books every month, especially the Hulk issues he did with Peter David. He had an art style that seemed very different and exciting, and I'd watched its potential develop from the early days on Infinity Inc. onwards (I'm a JSA fan). I enjoyed reading Amazing Spider-Man up to around issue 320 or so, and then started quickly losing interest in his work. I'd also bought the title because of David Michelinie's writing, being a fan of his run on Iron Man and, as has already been pointed out, his stories started becoming a lot weaker around this 320 point as well. By the time we get up to Spider-Man 1 ('Torment') I didn't like what McFarlane was doing at all, both art- and story-wise.

 

His art was great for that period, but now it looks very dated and a lot of style over substance, and doesn't appeal enough for me to purchase it all over again in Omnibus format.

[Conan_Aficionado]

George Carlin. "have you noticed that their stuff is junk and your junk is stuff."

 

 

[Chespirito]

George Carlin. "have you noticed that their stuff is junk and your junk is stuff."

 

 

Funny...

 

 

But oh sooo true

[Hamlet]

I would say that issues 262-292 of ASM were pretty darn bad. If it wasn't a Hobgoblin appearance, it wasn't worth reading.

 

The first comics I bought off the stands to collect were 260-261. It was all downhill from there to Kraven's last hunt.

 

I was thrilled with McFarlane because I suffered through almost 3 years of pure drek before it.

 

Most of what you highlight below was pretty good, but it was almost all before this dead spot in the run.

 

 

Man, I completely disagree with this. With the exception of a few storylines, Spider-man was great during the 80s. I love practically every issue from #193 - 300, and I like most of the Spectacular and Web issues from that time period. Just look at all the good stuff, Black Cat, #200 is a classic, Punisher, Kraven, Subby and the Frightful Four, Juggernaut, Hyde & Cobra, Hobgoblin, the Wrecking Crew, Kingpin and the Rose, the Symbiote Costume saga, Puma(ugh, not so much), Mary Jane returns, Spidey vs Firelord, Gang War, Hobgoblin dies, Pete and MJ get married and then Kraven's Last Hunt.

 

Great run through there with solid stories and mostly pretty good art with Frenz doing his best Ditko-esque work, and some early JRJR stuff that was pretty good.

[NewWorldOrder]

I was excited to see solicited in this months Previews that the Micheline/McFarlane ASM run will be collected in omnibus format.

 

I was wondering where you as a reader put this run in the grand scheme of all ASM stories/teams.

 

Look forward to some good input on the subject!

 

I rate is very high because Todd McFarlane ASM is the reason I started reading comic's in the first place.

 

For me the way he drew Spider-man was just creepy like a real spider. If I would have picked up my first comic and it was Mark Bagley's version of Spider-man I think I might have never came into the hobby probably.

 

Their collective run wasn't groundbreaking (except for Venom importance), but the art was solid, and the run had all the major villains one can ask for in a 25+ issue run.

 

 

[Hamlet]

You've remembered wrong (assuming you mean me ). I started collecting at issue 260.

 

The back issues were much, much better reading than the issues going forward for 2-3 years.

 

Really? Well, I'm glad somebody enjoyed those books. My buddy started collecting right around 238 and he loves them as much as anyone. I guess I just grew up on reading the older stuff and those will always be the best Spider-man stories by far to me.

[chrisco37]

I was excited to see solicited in this months Previews that the Micheline/McFarlane ASM run will be collected in omnibus format.

 

I was wondering where you as a reader put this run in the grand scheme of all ASM stories/teams.

 

Look forward to some good input on the subject!

 

Loved it, loved it, loved it. It was my introduction to Spiderman, through back issues. Loved every bit of it. Michelinie's writing blossomed with McFarlane's art, and they took full advantage of Spidey's Rogue's Gallery. My first "new" issue of Spidey was #332 or #333, so I missed out new, but just barely.

 

Loved every minute of it, except McFarlane's rushed art jobs in #321-323, and Rubenstein's AWFUL inks in #304 (not to mention McLeod's burial of #298 and #299.)

 

It is, to me, the quintessential Spiderman.

 

Renaissance for SpideyAs far as the run goes, it was the last great , and everything since has been boring (Spidey's parents, endless Venom repeats) to downright awful (the clone garbage, Norman Osborn and Gewn Stacy? )

 

Compared to the rest, the Hobgoblin saga was pretty awesome, and early Bronze was hummin'....I'd put the McFarlane era in the top 3 of Spidey runs in the last 50 (!) years.

 

Good call, RMA. It was about as good as you could hope for for the 90's (Vertigo books aside). Decent stories with some superb art. Like him or not, you cannot deny the influence McFarlane had on the character. McFarlane laid the groundwork for Spidey's "look" from ASM#298 to present (and I agree that McLeod's inks on 298/299 were horrible).

 

The issues were defintely more "art driven" than "writing driven". The sotrylines were solid, nothing spectacular. However, combined with the art, they were pretty good reads. I know I looked forward to the next issue.

 

Hindsight is always 20/20 and, in retrospect, there's nothing about the stories/writing that was anything close to groundbreaking. But, the art, for it's time was "amazing". 20 years later artists are still using the McFarlane interpretation of the character. That has to amount to something.

[jimjum12]

The bagged 7-11 copy got me back into collecting. I went @pesh!t over that stuff....talk about 110%. I never really like Spawn that much. I was almost as disappointed when Todd left ASM as I was when Kirby left the FF.....almost. GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

[delekkerste]

I truly disliked the Michelinie/McFarlane run on Spidey. I hated McFarlane's loopy cartoony art at the time, though I have grown to begrudgingly accept it as at least being unique and widely loved. And, compared to so much of the garbage art that we've seen in recent years, I guess its standing with me has improved a bit over time, though it still leaves me cold.

 

The stories, however...no. What made Spidey great was that Peter Parker was a down on his luck guy with real problems that people could relate to. Suddenly, in the Michelinie/McFarlane run, he's doing book tours while married to MJ the supermodel (drawn like a hooker, as someone astutely noted) and fighting brain-eating symbiote costumes from outer space. I mean, seriously? Suddenly, Peter Parker became the guy you couldn't relate to AT ALL, and the human core of the Spidey ethos and mythos was destroyed.

 

All in all, the run was just puerile garbage, which is why all you '90s kids out there lapped it up and asked for seconds!

[Ted Knight]

I truly disliked the Michelinie/McFarlane run on Spidey. I hated McFarlane's loopy cartoony art at the time, though I have grown to begrudgingly accept it as at least being unique and widely loved. And, compared to so much of the garbage art that we've seen in recent years, I guess its standing with me has improved a bit over time, though it still leaves me cold.

 

The stories, however...no. What made Spidey great was that Peter Parker was a down on his luck guy with real problems that people could relate to. Suddenly, in the Michelinie/McFarlane run, he's doing book tours while married to MJ the supermodel (drawn like a hooker, as someone astutely noted) and fighting brain-eating symbiote costumes from outer space. I mean, seriously? Suddenly, Peter Parker became the guy you couldn't relate to AT ALL, and the human core of the Spidey ethos and mythos was destroyed.

 

All in all, the run was just puerile garbage, which is why all you '90s kids out there lapped it up and asked for seconds!

 

Those are strong words. True. But strong words.

[Mac Man]

There are certain artists and writers from various periods that I enjoy. For the late-Copper / early-Modern comics, McFarlane & Michelinie are one of my favorites.

 

While I GET that their take on Spidey was very different from previous treatments, they reinvigorated him from some of the early-mid Copper work that got a little stale at points. And I think one of the important points to remember is that for Peter to be down on his luck, he must have fallen from some place. I always felt like that was part of where his "rise to popularity" during that period came from--bring him up so we can knock him down again.

 

Regardless, it was enjoyable for being different. I think people who can't appreciate that (not like it, but at least appreciate it) are probably just too wrapped up in their own tastes and need to step away from the funny books.

[500Club]

I truly disliked the Michelinie/McFarlane run on Spidey. I hated McFarlane's loopy cartoony art at the time, though I have grown to begrudgingly accept it as at least being unique and widely loved. And, compared to so much of the garbage art that we've seen in recent years, I guess its standing with me has improved a bit over time, though it still leaves me cold.

 

The stories, however...no. What made Spidey great was that Peter Parker was a down on his luck guy with real problems that people could relate to. Suddenly, in the Michelinie/McFarlane run, he's doing book tours while married to MJ the supermodel (drawn like a hooker, as someone astutely noted) and fighting brain-eating symbiote costumes from outer space. I mean, seriously? Suddenly, Peter Parker became the guy you couldn't relate to AT ALL, and the human core of the Spidey ethos and mythos was destroyed.

 

All in all, the run was just puerile garbage, which is why all you '90s kids out there lapped it up and asked for seconds!

 

You're by far in the minority, Aston-Martin-driving snob

 

The M+M run was a fun read. McFarlane had plenty of technical shortcomings, but the energy and dynamics of the art led to him becoming a star.

 

As for the story, see it how you want, but sadly, that was the last period where any writer tried to advance Peter Parker's personal life.

[Hammerhead]

I truly disliked the Michelinie/McFarlane run on Spidey. I hated McFarlane's loopy cartoony art at the time, though I have grown to begrudgingly accept it as at least being unique and widely loved. And, compared to so much of the garbage art that we've seen in recent years, I guess its standing with me has improved a bit over time, though it still leaves me cold.

 

The stories, however...no. What made Spidey great was that Peter Parker was a down on his luck guy with real problems that people could relate to. Suddenly, in the Michelinie/McFarlane run, he's doing book tours while married to MJ the supermodel (drawn like a hooker, as someone astutely noted) and fighting brain-eating symbiote costumes from outer space. I mean, seriously? Suddenly, Peter Parker became the guy you couldn't relate to AT ALL, and the human core of the Spidey ethos and mythos was destroyed.

 

All in all, the run was just puerile garbage, which is why all you '90s kids out there lapped it up and asked for seconds!

 

You're by far in the minority, Aston-Martin-driving snob

 

The M+M run was a fun read. McFarlane had plenty of technical shortcomings, but the energy and dynamics of the art led to him becoming a star.

 

As for the story, see it how you want, but sadly, that was the last period where any writer tried to advance Peter Parker's personal life.

 

I think JMS tried real hard to "advance" Peter's personal life...not really per my liking but he sure tried! I actually liked Aunt May finding out Peter was Spidey....but now I am just getting off topic.

[jimjum12]

I truly disliked the Michelinie/McFarlane run on Spidey. I hated McFarlane's loopy cartoony art at the time, though I have grown to begrudgingly accept it as at least being unique and widely loved. And, compared to so much of the garbage art that we've seen in recent years, I guess its standing with me has improved a bit over time, though it still leaves me cold.

 

The stories, however...no. What made Spidey great was that Peter Parker was a down on his luck guy with real problems that people could relate to. Suddenly, in the Michelinie/McFarlane run, he's doing book tours while married to MJ the supermodel (drawn like a hooker, as someone astutely noted) and fighting brain-eating symbiote costumes from outer space. I mean, seriously? Suddenly, Peter Parker became the guy you couldn't relate to AT ALL, and the human core of the Spidey ethos and mythos was destroyed.

 

All in all, the run was just puerile garbage, which is why all you '90s kids out there lapped it up and asked for seconds!

 

You're by far in the minority, Aston-Martin-driving snob

 

The M+M run was a fun read. McFarlane had plenty of technical shortcomings, but the energy and dynamics of the art led to him becoming a star.

 

As for the story, see it how you want, but sadly, that was the last period where any writer tried to advance Peter Parker's personal life.

 

I have to agree....if it's realism and technical skill we're looking for, there are always the Rio graphic novels by Doug Wildey. GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

[RockMyAmadeus]

and fighting brain-eating symbiote costumes from outer space. I mean, seriously?

 

To be fair, Peter was fighting brain-eating symbiote costumes years before Todd McFarlane ever set pencil to Spidey page.

[Boboset]

 

Jim Lee, Silvestri, and McFarlane were the only real talent which went to image. The rest of the guys were marginal at best. Lee and McFarlane will always be remembered as the best of their generation.

 

I think that Erik Larsen is/was top level talent. You gotta watch the guy draw sometime; he's the Keith Moon of penciling. Sorry you're not a fan Dale.

 

If you count 'acquisitions' immediately after the founding it's worth including Dale Keown and Sam Kieth.

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

Erik Larsen is a dink who can't keep his stupid politics out of his art.

 

That makes him LAME.

[Boboset]

Erik Larsen is a dink who can't keep his stupid politics out of his art.

 

That makes him LAME.

 

It's fair to think that he's lame but that doesn't make him a bad artist.

 

Lebron James is beyond 'dink' level but he's an amazing basketball player.

 

You know what I'm saying here, and I can tell that you really do not like Larsen.

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

Erik Larsen is a dink who can't keep his stupid politics out of his art.

 

That makes him LAME.

 

It's fair to think that he's lame but that doesn't make him a bad artist.

 

Lebron James is beyond 'dink' level but he's an amazing basketball player.

 

You know what I'm saying here, and I can tell that you really do not like Larsen.

 

 

Larsen as a person, or Larsen as an artist?