Most significant X-Men

[kav]

Not a fan of the Q-Ball look...

[RockMyAmadeus]

Wow.

 

 

I'm sorry, what were we talking about again....?

 

 

[Darkowl]

It very much was an "X-Men" thing, as opposed to a "Wolverine" thing. Marvel Team Up Annual #1, Power Man & Iron Fist #57, Rom #17-18, What If #27, Bizarre Adventures #27, Avengers Annual #10, all X-MEN appearances, as opposed to spotlighting any single character. Arguments that Wolverine was a breakout star by or at X-Men #133 are unsupportable.

 

Arguments like this don't prove anything. Remember, back then things were done in continuity. Wolverine was part of a team, so he couldn't simultaneously be in 5 crossovers at one time on a solo basis! When Wolverine goes off to Japan for his mini-series, guess what? He disappears from Uncanny X-Men for several issues, which is why he's surprised at the beginning of #172 to learn that Rogue is now part of the team not a foe. The short answer is that it was simply easier to write in all of the X-Men into crossovers than just Wolverine. And why not get more bang for the buck with the whole team anyway? But, make no mistake - Wolverine was *the* driving factor that caused the title to soar to the top of the popularity heap in 1982-83.

 

Shooter only made Claremont/Byrne kill Phoenix because the latter had her take billions of lives as Dark Phoenix. To think that Claremont didn't have control over Wolverine because of that isolated example doesn't hold any water.

 

 

As you point out...Dazzler got her own book. New Mutants got their own book. Alpha Flight, Power Pack, Avengers West Coast (Mini AND regular), X-Factor, Cloak & Dagger...yes, CLOAK AND DAGGER...Punisher...ALF...the New Universe...Star Comics....all of these characters got their regular series before Wolverine got his own. Spidey was in FOUR titles, three new and one reprint. Beast, Nightcrawler, Magik, Longshot, Punisher, Hercules (TWICE), Vision and the Scarlet Witch (TWICE) all had minis.

 

Dazzler got her own book to cash in on the disco craze (too late as it turned out). She, and numerous others of the examples you mentioned, weren't regulars in any ongoing title (you forgot The Falcon and Jack of Hearts), so it made sense that they were showcased separately. But, you neglect the fact that, even with Wolverine as the star of UXM, his mini-series outsold all of the others you mentioned. Just because Hercules got a mini-series doesn't mean he was anywhere near Wolverine's level. And, the fact that Wolverine didn't get his regular series until 1988 doesn't mean jack squat - he was getting plenty of exposure before then in UXM, the various mini-series (his solo, KP & W, X-Men vs. Micronauts, Avengers vs. X-Men, FF vs. X-Men, SPM vs. Wolverine one-shot, etc.), Classic X-Men, etc. To say that his popularity broke out in 1988 totally confuses cause and effect. His ongoing title in 1988 was the effect - the cause was that he had already been Marvel's most popular character for most of the past 6 years.

 

Can you please tone down your emotions here? People on this board are just a little sensitive when they are shown they are wrong. I would hate for a post like this to hurt anyone's feelings.

[Randall Dowling]

I think it's worth considering that the reason X-men members didn't have their own title for a long time may have been because Marvel was still trying to maintain the Marvel Universe continuity that had made it so successful up to that point. It wasn't until the mid-80s that the continuity started to unravel and eventually, they just abandoned ship on it entirely.

 

My guess is that it was purely about being able to sell as many titles as possible and keep everything somewhat interrelated was an editorial impossibility with some many independent story lines. For me, this was one of the big losses for comics in the 80s. Instead it all became about the "limited series", of which I can't name a single one that was really that awesome. And I include Miller's Wolverine series in that assessment. Yes, it was hugely popular. But I wasn't particularly in love with the storyline or Miller's rendition of Wolverine. In fact, most of my friends thought Miller's redefining Wolverine's claws as less "claw like" and more akin to razors as pretty stupid.

[RockMyAmadeus]

It very much was an "X-Men" thing, as opposed to a "Wolverine" thing. Marvel Team Up Annual #1, Power Man & Iron Fist #57, Rom #17-18, What If #27, Bizarre Adventures #27, Avengers Annual #10, all X-MEN appearances, as opposed to spotlighting any single character. Arguments that Wolverine was a breakout star by or at X-Men #133 are unsupportable.

 

Arguments like this don't prove anything. Remember, back then things were done in continuity. Wolverine was part of a team, so he couldn't simultaneously be in 5 crossovers at one time on a solo basis! When Wolverine goes off to Japan for his mini-series, guess what? He disappears from Uncanny X-Men for several issues, which is why he's surprised at the beginning of #172 to learn that Rogue is now part of the team not a foe. The short answer is that it was simply easier to write in all of the X-Men into crossovers than just Wolverine. And why not get more bang for the buck with the whole team anyway? But, make no mistake - Wolverine was *the* driving factor that caused the title to soar to the top of the popularity heap in 1982-83.

 

Shooter only made Claremont/Byrne kill Phoenix because the latter had her take billions of lives as Dark Phoenix. To think that Claremont didn't have control over Wolverine because of that isolated example doesn't hold any water.

 

 

As you point out...Dazzler got her own book. New Mutants got their own book. Alpha Flight, Power Pack, Avengers West Coast (Mini AND regular), X-Factor, Cloak & Dagger...yes, CLOAK AND DAGGER...Punisher...ALF...the New Universe...Star Comics....all of these characters got their regular series before Wolverine got his own. Spidey was in FOUR titles, three new and one reprint. Beast, Nightcrawler, Magik, Longshot, Punisher, Hercules (TWICE), Vision and the Scarlet Witch (TWICE) all had minis.

 

Dazzler got her own book to cash in on the disco craze (too late as it turned out). She, and numerous others of the examples you mentioned, weren't regulars in any ongoing title (you forgot The Falcon and Jack of Hearts), so it made sense that they were showcased separately. But, you neglect the fact that, even with Wolverine as the star of UXM, his mini-series outsold all of the others you mentioned. Just because Hercules got a mini-series doesn't mean he was anywhere near Wolverine's level. And, the fact that Wolverine didn't get his regular series until 1988 doesn't mean jack squat - he was getting plenty of exposure before then in UXM, the various mini-series (his solo, KP & W, X-Men vs. Micronauts, Avengers vs. X-Men, FF vs. X-Men, SPM vs. Wolverine one-shot, etc.), Classic X-Men, etc. To say that his popularity broke out in 1988 totally confuses cause and effect. His ongoing title in 1988 was the effect - the cause was that he had already been Marvel's most popular character for most of the past 6 years.

 

Can you please tone down your emotions here? People on this board are just a little sensitive when they are shown they are wrong. I would hate for a post like this to hurt anyone's feelings.

 

One more time:

 

If you don't like what someone says, or the way they say it, either make a real effort to resolve it, or ignore it.

 

As Broke says, "why do people have to get confrontational?"

[RockMyAmadeus]

I think it's worth considering that the reason X-men members didn't have their own title for a long time may have been because Marvel was still trying to maintain the Marvel Universe continuity that had made it so successful up to that point. It wasn't until the mid-80s that the continuity started to unravel and eventually, they just abandoned ship on it entirely.

 

My guess is that it was purely about being able to sell as many titles as possible and keep everything somewhat interrelated was an editorial impossibility with some many independent story lines. For me, this was one of the big losses for comics in the 80s. Instead it all became about the "limited series", of which I can't name a single one that was really that awesome. And I include Miller's Wolverine series in that assessment. Yes, it was hugely popular. But I wasn't particularly in love with the storyline or Miller's rendition of Wolverine. In fact, most of my friends thought Miller's redefining Wolverine's claws as less "claw like" and more akin to razors as pretty stupid.

 

Not nearly as stupid, however, as "revealing" they were "bones" the whole time (which is a physiological impossibility, even in suspended disbelief.)

 

One of the most idiotic things Marvel has ever published.

[Darkowl]

It very much was an "X-Men" thing, as opposed to a "Wolverine" thing. Marvel Team Up Annual #1, Power Man & Iron Fist #57, Rom #17-18, What If #27, Bizarre Adventures #27, Avengers Annual #10, all X-MEN appearances, as opposed to spotlighting any single character. Arguments that Wolverine was a breakout star by or at X-Men #133 are unsupportable.

 

Arguments like this don't prove anything. Remember, back then things were done in continuity. Wolverine was part of a team, so he couldn't simultaneously be in 5 crossovers at one time on a solo basis! When Wolverine goes off to Japan for his mini-series, guess what? He disappears from Uncanny X-Men for several issues, which is why he's surprised at the beginning of #172 to learn that Rogue is now part of the team not a foe. The short answer is that it was simply easier to write in all of the X-Men into crossovers than just Wolverine. And why not get more bang for the buck with the whole team anyway? But, make no mistake - Wolverine was *the* driving factor that caused the title to soar to the top of the popularity heap in 1982-83.

 

Shooter only made Claremont/Byrne kill Phoenix because the latter had her take billions of lives as Dark Phoenix. To think that Claremont didn't have control over Wolverine because of that isolated example doesn't hold any water.

 

 

As you point out...Dazzler got her own book. New Mutants got their own book. Alpha Flight, Power Pack, Avengers West Coast (Mini AND regular), X-Factor, Cloak & Dagger...yes, CLOAK AND DAGGER...Punisher...ALF...the New Universe...Star Comics....all of these characters got their regular series before Wolverine got his own. Spidey was in FOUR titles, three new and one reprint. Beast, Nightcrawler, Magik, Longshot, Punisher, Hercules (TWICE), Vision and the Scarlet Witch (TWICE) all had minis.

 

Dazzler got her own book to cash in on the disco craze (too late as it turned out). She, and numerous others of the examples you mentioned, weren't regulars in any ongoing title (you forgot The Falcon and Jack of Hearts), so it made sense that they were showcased separately. But, you neglect the fact that, even with Wolverine as the star of UXM, his mini-series outsold all of the others you mentioned. Just because Hercules got a mini-series doesn't mean he was anywhere near Wolverine's level. And, the fact that Wolverine didn't get his regular series until 1988 doesn't mean jack squat - he was getting plenty of exposure before then in UXM, the various mini-series (his solo, KP & W, X-Men vs. Micronauts, Avengers vs. X-Men, FF vs. X-Men, SPM vs. Wolverine one-shot, etc.), Classic X-Men, etc. To say that his popularity broke out in 1988 totally confuses cause and effect. His ongoing title in 1988 was the effect - the cause was that he had already been Marvel's most popular character for most of the past 6 years.

 

Can you please tone down your emotions here? People on this board are just a little sensitive when they are shown they are wrong. I would hate for a post like this to hurt anyone's feelings.

 

One more time:

 

If you don't like what someone says, or the way they say it, either make a real effort to resolve it, or ignore it.

 

As Broke says, "why do people have to get confrontational?"

 

I gotta say, I did not see that one coming.

[Prince Namor]

It very much was an "X-Men" thing, as opposed to a "Wolverine" thing. Marvel Team Up Annual #1, Power Man & Iron Fist #57, Rom #17-18, What If #27, Bizarre Adventures #27, Avengers Annual #10, all X-MEN appearances, as opposed to spotlighting any single character. Arguments that Wolverine was a breakout star by or at X-Men #133 are unsupportable.

 

Arguments like this don't prove anything. Remember, back then things were done in continuity. Wolverine was part of a team, so he couldn't simultaneously be in 5 crossovers at one time on a solo basis! When Wolverine goes off to Japan for his mini-series, guess what? He disappears from Uncanny X-Men for several issues, which is why he's surprised at the beginning of #172 to learn that Rogue is now part of the team not a foe. The short answer is that it was simply easier to write in all of the X-Men into crossovers than just Wolverine. And why not get more bang for the buck with the whole team anyway? But, make no mistake - Wolverine was *the* driving factor that caused the title to soar to the top of the popularity heap in 1982-83.

 

Shooter only made Claremont/Byrne kill Phoenix because the latter had her take billions of lives as Dark Phoenix. To think that Claremont didn't have control over Wolverine because of that isolated example doesn't hold any water.

 

 

As you point out...Dazzler got her own book. New Mutants got their own book. Alpha Flight, Power Pack, Avengers West Coast (Mini AND regular), X-Factor, Cloak & Dagger...yes, CLOAK AND DAGGER...Punisher...ALF...the New Universe...Star Comics....all of these characters got their regular series before Wolverine got his own. Spidey was in FOUR titles, three new and one reprint. Beast, Nightcrawler, Magik, Longshot, Punisher, Hercules (TWICE), Vision and the Scarlet Witch (TWICE) all had minis.

 

Dazzler got her own book to cash in on the disco craze (too late as it turned out). She, and numerous others of the examples you mentioned, weren't regulars in any ongoing title (you forgot The Falcon and Jack of Hearts), so it made sense that they were showcased separately. But, you neglect the fact that, even with Wolverine as the star of UXM, his mini-series outsold all of the others you mentioned. Just because Hercules got a mini-series doesn't mean he was anywhere near Wolverine's level. And, the fact that Wolverine didn't get his regular series until 1988 doesn't mean jack squat - he was getting plenty of exposure before then in UXM, the various mini-series (his solo, KP & W, X-Men vs. Micronauts, Avengers vs. X-Men, FF vs. X-Men, SPM vs. Wolverine one-shot, etc.), Classic X-Men, etc. To say that his popularity broke out in 1988 totally confuses cause and effect. His ongoing title in 1988 was the effect - the cause was that he had already been Marvel's most popular character for most of the past 6 years.

 

Can you please tone down your emotions here? People on this board are just a little sensitive when they are shown they are wrong. I would hate for a post like this to hurt anyone's feelings.

 

One more time:

 

If you don't like what someone says, or the way they say it, either make a real effort to resolve it, or ignore it.

 

As Broke says, "why do people have to get confrontational?"

 

I gotta say, I did not see that one coming.

 

It's called 'Staying calm as someone continually tries to bait you.'

[Darkowl]

It very much was an "X-Men" thing, as opposed to a "Wolverine" thing. Marvel Team Up Annual #1, Power Man & Iron Fist #57, Rom #17-18, What If #27, Bizarre Adventures #27, Avengers Annual #10, all X-MEN appearances, as opposed to spotlighting any single character. Arguments that Wolverine was a breakout star by or at X-Men #133 are unsupportable.

 

Arguments like this don't prove anything. Remember, back then things were done in continuity. Wolverine was part of a team, so he couldn't simultaneously be in 5 crossovers at one time on a solo basis! When Wolverine goes off to Japan for his mini-series, guess what? He disappears from Uncanny X-Men for several issues, which is why he's surprised at the beginning of #172 to learn that Rogue is now part of the team not a foe. The short answer is that it was simply easier to write in all of the X-Men into crossovers than just Wolverine. And why not get more bang for the buck with the whole team anyway? But, make no mistake - Wolverine was *the* driving factor that caused the title to soar to the top of the popularity heap in 1982-83.

 

Shooter only made Claremont/Byrne kill Phoenix because the latter had her take billions of lives as Dark Phoenix. To think that Claremont didn't have control over Wolverine because of that isolated example doesn't hold any water.

 

 

As you point out...Dazzler got her own book. New Mutants got their own book. Alpha Flight, Power Pack, Avengers West Coast (Mini AND regular), X-Factor, Cloak & Dagger...yes, CLOAK AND DAGGER...Punisher...ALF...the New Universe...Star Comics....all of these characters got their regular series before Wolverine got his own. Spidey was in FOUR titles, three new and one reprint. Beast, Nightcrawler, Magik, Longshot, Punisher, Hercules (TWICE), Vision and the Scarlet Witch (TWICE) all had minis.

 

Dazzler got her own book to cash in on the disco craze (too late as it turned out). She, and numerous others of the examples you mentioned, weren't regulars in any ongoing title (you forgot The Falcon and Jack of Hearts), so it made sense that they were showcased separately. But, you neglect the fact that, even with Wolverine as the star of UXM, his mini-series outsold all of the others you mentioned. Just because Hercules got a mini-series doesn't mean he was anywhere near Wolverine's level. And, the fact that Wolverine didn't get his regular series until 1988 doesn't mean jack squat - he was getting plenty of exposure before then in UXM, the various mini-series (his solo, KP & W, X-Men vs. Micronauts, Avengers vs. X-Men, FF vs. X-Men, SPM vs. Wolverine one-shot, etc.), Classic X-Men, etc. To say that his popularity broke out in 1988 totally confuses cause and effect. His ongoing title in 1988 was the effect - the cause was that he had already been Marvel's most popular character for most of the past 6 years.

 

Can you please tone down your emotions here? People on this board are just a little sensitive when they are shown they are wrong. I would hate for a post like this to hurt anyone's feelings.

 

One more time:

 

If you don't like what someone says, or the way they say it, either make a real effort to resolve it, or ignore it.

 

As Broke says, "why do people have to get confrontational?"

 

I gotta say, I did not see that one coming.

 

It's called 'Staying calm as someone continually tries to bait you.'

 

Oh, is that what he was doing? I had no idea.

[Randall Dowling]

I think it's worth considering that the reason X-men members didn't have their own title for a long time may have been because Marvel was still trying to maintain the Marvel Universe continuity that had made it so successful up to that point. It wasn't until the mid-80s that the continuity started to unravel and eventually, they just abandoned ship on it entirely.

 

My guess is that it was purely about being able to sell as many titles as possible and keep everything somewhat interrelated was an editorial impossibility with some many independent story lines. For me, this was one of the big losses for comics in the 80s. Instead it all became about the "limited series", of which I can't name a single one that was really that awesome. And I include Miller's Wolverine series in that assessment. Yes, it was hugely popular. But I wasn't particularly in love with the storyline or Miller's rendition of Wolverine. In fact, most of my friends thought Miller's redefining Wolverine's claws as less "claw like" and more akin to razors as pretty stupid.

 

Not nearly as stupid, however, as "revealing" they were "bones" the whole time (which is a physiological impossibility, even in suspended disbelief.)

 

One of the most idiotic things Marvel has ever published.

Agreed. I have to say that the "development" of Wolverine (and most Marvel characters) during the 80s was something that would have been better if they had just left well enough alone. It's almost as if they thought that in order to be more interesting, they had to get more specific and in doing so, ended up a lot less believable.

 

If you tell someone that this guy got bitten by a radioactive spider and afterward, he had all these weird spider-like powers, then that leaves a lot up to the imagination. But if you start getting ultra specific about how exactly his fingers stick to buildings, it starts to sound kind of dumb and a little gross.

[kav]

I think it's worth considering that the reason X-men members didn't have their own title for a long time may have been because Marvel was still trying to maintain the Marvel Universe continuity that had made it so successful up to that point. It wasn't until the mid-80s that the continuity started to unravel and eventually, they just abandoned ship on it entirely.

 

My guess is that it was purely about being able to sell as many titles as possible and keep everything somewhat interrelated was an editorial impossibility with some many independent story lines. For me, this was one of the big losses for comics in the 80s. Instead it all became about the "limited series", of which I can't name a single one that was really that awesome. And I include Miller's Wolverine series in that assessment. Yes, it was hugely popular. But I wasn't particularly in love with the storyline or Miller's rendition of Wolverine. In fact, most of my friends thought Miller's redefining Wolverine's claws as less "claw like" and more akin to razors as pretty stupid.

 

Not nearly as stupid, however, as "revealing" they were "bones" the whole time (which is a physiological impossibility, even in suspended disbelief.)

 

One of the most idiotic things Marvel has ever published.

Agreed. I have to say that the "development" of Wolverine (and most Marvel characters) during the 80s was something that would have been better if they had just left well enough alone. It's almost as if they thought that in order to be more interesting, they had to get more specific and in doing so, ended up a lot less believable.

 

If you tell someone that this guy got bitten by a radioactive spider and afterward, he had all these weird spider-like powers, then that leaves a lot up to the imagination. But if you start getting ultra specific about how exactly his fingers stick to buildings, it starts to sound kind of dumb and a little gross.

Yep. Then you have to ask how those little hair-prongs don't get snagged in his gloves and ripped out painfully when he takes his gloves off, how they push thru his boot soles to allow him to stand on side of bldg, how come his web doesn't foul against glove opening and a whole host of other problems.

[chrisco37]

Punisher blew up when the Zeck mini came out. Up until that point, I don't even remember him being in any conversations. As someone said earlier, there's not really much to tell about him. Personally, I've never really understood the massive appeal. I realize I'm in a very small minority. I did read one of his titles for short while, but only because I wanted to see what Ennis was going to do with him.

 

Wolverine was a "big deal" for as long as I can remember. Again, I was in elementary school in the 80's and all my friends and I thought he was awesome. He was tough, he was a badarse, he played by a different set of rules, he had the claws, he fought ninjas (that was a great post). Everyone I knew thought he was the coolest (I've always been a Spidey is #1 guy), but Wolverine was right up there in next tier for me. He's dropped down on my list quite a bit since then (probably due to the overexposure). I wasn't a Hulk reader, but I made sure I grabbed that Hulk #340 off the spinner rack in 7-Eleven when I saw it.

 

 

[Prince Namor]

It very much was an "X-Men" thing, as opposed to a "Wolverine" thing. Marvel Team Up Annual #1, Power Man & Iron Fist #57, Rom #17-18, What If #27, Bizarre Adventures #27, Avengers Annual #10, all X-MEN appearances, as opposed to spotlighting any single character. Arguments that Wolverine was a breakout star by or at X-Men #133 are unsupportable.

 

Arguments like this don't prove anything. Remember, back then things were done in continuity. Wolverine was part of a team, so he couldn't simultaneously be in 5 crossovers at one time on a solo basis! When Wolverine goes off to Japan for his mini-series, guess what? He disappears from Uncanny X-Men for several issues, which is why he's surprised at the beginning of #172 to learn that Rogue is now part of the team not a foe. The short answer is that it was simply easier to write in all of the X-Men into crossovers than just Wolverine. And why not get more bang for the buck with the whole team anyway? But, make no mistake - Wolverine was *the* driving factor that caused the title to soar to the top of the popularity heap in 1982-83.

 

Shooter only made Claremont/Byrne kill Phoenix because the latter had her take billions of lives as Dark Phoenix. To think that Claremont didn't have control over Wolverine because of that isolated example doesn't hold any water.

 

 

As you point out...Dazzler got her own book. New Mutants got their own book. Alpha Flight, Power Pack, Avengers West Coast (Mini AND regular), X-Factor, Cloak & Dagger...yes, CLOAK AND DAGGER...Punisher...ALF...the New Universe...Star Comics....all of these characters got their regular series before Wolverine got his own. Spidey was in FOUR titles, three new and one reprint. Beast, Nightcrawler, Magik, Longshot, Punisher, Hercules (TWICE), Vision and the Scarlet Witch (TWICE) all had minis.

 

Dazzler got her own book to cash in on the disco craze (too late as it turned out). She, and numerous others of the examples you mentioned, weren't regulars in any ongoing title (you forgot The Falcon and Jack of Hearts), so it made sense that they were showcased separately. But, you neglect the fact that, even with Wolverine as the star of UXM, his mini-series outsold all of the others you mentioned. Just because Hercules got a mini-series doesn't mean he was anywhere near Wolverine's level. And, the fact that Wolverine didn't get his regular series until 1988 doesn't mean jack squat - he was getting plenty of exposure before then in UXM, the various mini-series (his solo, KP & W, X-Men vs. Micronauts, Avengers vs. X-Men, FF vs. X-Men, SPM vs. Wolverine one-shot, etc.), Classic X-Men, etc. To say that his popularity broke out in 1988 totally confuses cause and effect. His ongoing title in 1988 was the effect - the cause was that he had already been Marvel's most popular character for most of the past 6 years.

 

Can you please tone down your emotions here? People on this board are just a little sensitive when they are shown they are wrong. I would hate for a post like this to hurt anyone's feelings.

 

One more time:

 

If you don't like what someone says, or the way they say it, either make a real effort to resolve it, or ignore it.

 

As Broke says, "why do people have to get confrontational?"

 

I gotta say, I did not see that one coming.

 

It's called 'Staying calm as someone continually tries to bait you.'

 

Oh, is that what he was doing? I had no idea.

 

Yes, he was remaining calm.

[kav]

I'm calm.

[Darkowl]

I'm calm.

 

I'm not sure If I've ever seen you uncalm, even when people are tearing you to shreds. It's an excellent characteristic.

[kav]

I'm calm.

 

I'm not sure If I've ever seen you uncalm, even when people are tearing you to shreds. It's an excellent characteristic.

 

[Unca Ben]

I'm calm.

 

I'm not sure If I've ever seen you uncalm, even when people are tearing you to shreds. It's an excellent characteristic.

 

+1

[Unca Ben]

 

If you tell someone that this guy got bitten by a radioactive spider and afterward, he had all these weird spider-like powers, then that leaves a lot up to the imagination. But if you start getting ultra specific about how exactly his fingers stick to buildings, it starts to sound kind of dumb and a little gross.

Yep. Then you have to ask how those little hair-prongs don't get snagged in his gloves and ripped out painfully when he takes his gloves off, how they push thru his boot soles to allow him to stand on side of bldg, how come his web doesn't foul against glove opening and a whole host of other problems.

Which is why Ditko decided to draw Spider-Man with soft soles instead of boots. Not that Ditko or Lee detailed exactly how Spidey's clinging power worked.

 

"Ditko recalled:

 

One of the first things I did was to work up a costume. A vital, visual part of the character. I had to know how he looked ... before I did any breakdowns. For example: A clinging power so he wouldn't have hard shoes or boots, a hidden wrist-shooter versus a web gun and holster, etc. ... I wasn't sure Stan would like the idea of covering the character's face but I did it because it hid an obviously boyish face. It would also add mystery to the character...."

[slym2none]

What's the most ridiculous, puny and stupid character ever conceived? I vote Woodgod.

 

The Impossible Man.

 

 

 

-slym

[VintageComics]

What's the most ridiculous, puny and stupid character ever conceived? I vote Woodgod.

 

The Impossible Man.

 

 

 

-slym

 

FF #176 is one of the greatest single issues of all time.

 

FF #11 is awesome.

 

Disagree.