Which one is better?
Spider-man: The Animated Series (1994)
60.9% (14)
60.9% (14)
Spectacular Spider-man (2008)
34.8% (8)
34.8% (8)
Want to vote? Register now or Sign Up with Facebook
Poll: Spectacular Spider-man vs Spider-man 94'

I had some argument on that matter recently, where my opossition was saying that both the fans and critics find Spectacular more better and mature.
I was like WTH, cuz for all my live I haven't met a single person who liked spectacular more.
So help me to solve this question.

image

I never saw the 2008 series, but the 1994 series was so terribly animated, it was hilarious.

I haven't seen the new one but I watched the one from the 90's all the time, so that.

It's intro was fucking weird though. What is with that music?!

I don't like the 1994 version, but I've never watched the 2008 version, to be fair the only recent cartoon I've watched is Batman the Brave and the Bold, and that's because that thing is 100% awesome.
If I had to bet blindly I'll say Spectacular is probably better but just because Amazing was terrible and I don't think it can be worse, given how much better the animation quality is, I'm betting the writing and voice acting are probably better too.

I'm only saying the 1994 version out of nostalgia since I do view Spectacular Spiderman to be somewhat better (and had an awesome animation stle) but only because the 1994 is now somewhat outdated.
Also another reason why I ain't voting for Spectaculr is due to the fact it was cut off short while the 1994 had tons of episodes but it wasn't cancel due to poor rating. This cut off pretty much didn't give it a chance to show its potential despite both seasons were off to a great start.

Daystar Clarion:

I never saw the 2008 series, but the 1994 series was so terribly animated, it was hilarious.

Yeah but...that guy was a great Spider-Man. I can't remember his name. I always just say Greg Brady was the real Spider-Man in the 90's.

Man, that's an awkward clip on a few different levels.

Hazy992:
It's intro was fucking weird though. What is with that music?!

It was a 90's thing. Look up the X-Men theme and the Power Rangers theme. It's all these weird guitar fret-wanking music.

DustyDrB:
It was a 90's thing. Look up the X-Men theme and the Power Rangers theme. It's all these weird guitar fret-wanking music.

The X-Men and Power Rangers themes are just straight up awesome though! :D

I loved the 2008 series, but admittedly I don't remember much of the 1994 version apart from the Venom arc.

Soviet Heavy:
I loved the 2008 series, but admittedly I don't remember much of the 1994 version apart from the Venom arc.

It was overall very good. Too many cross-over episodes, but that's just a personal issue for me (I hate it when superheros appear together. Makes me cringe). Especially since the "guest" hero would often rob the spotlight (the Blade episodes were the worst...). The ending was basically a giant cross-over arch. I think they had six different versions of Spider-Man fighting together...

It also had that 90's thing where they couldn't say "kill", "die", "dead", or anything like that. So they used tons of euphemisms. It was pretty funny at times, though.

DustyDrB:

Soviet Heavy:
I loved the 2008 series, but admittedly I don't remember much of the 1994 version apart from the Venom arc.

It was overall very good. Too many cross-over episodes, but that's just a personal issue for me (I hate it when superheros appear together. Makes me cringe). Especially since the "guest" hero would often rob the spotlight (the Blade episodes were the worst...). The ending was basically a giant cross-over arch. I think they had six different versions of Spider-Man fighting together...

It also had that 90's thing where they couldn't say "kill", "die", "dead", or anything like that. So they used tons of euphemisms. It was pretty funny at times, though.

What I saw of the Venom episodes was pretty damn cool, and now that I think about it, I remember there being an X-Men crossover as well. I just never got into it that much, since I spent more time watching Batman or Starship Troopers.

Soviet Heavy:

DustyDrB:

Soviet Heavy:
I loved the 2008 series, but admittedly I don't remember much of the 1994 version apart from the Venom arc.

It was overall very good. Too many cross-over episodes, but that's just a personal issue for me (I hate it when superheros appear together. Makes me cringe). Especially since the "guest" hero would often rob the spotlight (the Blade episodes were the worst...). The ending was basically a giant cross-over arch. I think they had six different versions of Spider-Man fighting together...

It also had that 90's thing where they couldn't say "kill", "die", "dead", or anything like that. So they used tons of euphemisms. It was pretty funny at times, though.

What I saw of the Venom episodes was pretty damn cool, and now that I think about it, I remember there being an X-Men crossover as well. I just never got into it that much, since I spent more time watching Batman or Starship Troopers.

Venom is part of Spider-Man's world, though. So he doesn't bother me. In fact, I love the "symbiote" episodes in general (though I think The Punisher appeared in some...maybe). It's impressive how terrifying and savage they managed to make Carnage even with the neutering of the violence.

Daystar Clarion:

I never saw the 2008 series, but the 1994 series was so terribly animated, it was hilarious.

Crapbaskets, stole the words right out of my mouth.

I actually love the designs in the '94 version, but yeah, the animation quality is god awful. The only thing that is worse than their talking-scenes and fight-scenes, are the scenes when you see him swinging through the god awful 3D models of New York. I'm a 17 year old student, and even I have done better matchmoving than them. Seriously, I've never seen such disjointed animation like what's presented in his swinging scenes.

I'm not voting because I was rather fond of both equally.

But I laugh at those who said Spectacular Spider-Man was more mature than Spider-Man of the 90's. Like seriously?? I don't believe that.

Spectacular Spider-Man was more of the way that the current Ultimate Spider-Man show on Disney XD. Lighter, more fun. That type. With a mix of dark in between just right.

90's Spider-Man was a bit darker. Predominantly. Hardly any humor at all. And way too much angsty Peter Parker at times. The bad guys were a little badder, everyone looked older and yadda, yadda, yadda.

I adored the 90's version, actually. I think it usually ran in the morning during the summers at a very convenient time for me, so it was my main breakfast-event. It was fun, excitement and stuff blowing up, even if the dub could be quite horrible at points. All I really asked for when I was a kid.

And come to think of it... That particular spiderman IS spiderman to me. I don't read superhero-comics, and I've never really cared much for superheroes in general. But just as the Animated Series Batman is my (goddamn) Batman, this is my spiderman. If I find it, I'm so getting the DVD of this series, just for nostalgia-points if nothing else.

All together now! Pidermahn, pidermahn, radehoective pidermahn!

But then again, I'm being unfair. I know I'm not going to watch Spectacular, for all I know, it could be much, much better. And again, I'm not exactly the person to ask to get a very thoughtful opinion on things super.

Spectacular was brilliant

Anyone who says the 90's series was anywhere near better than Spectacular should really take off those rose rimmed glasses. The 90's series was horrendous. It was censored so, for example, Spider-Man couldn't punch anyone or "Couldn't land on pigeons on rooftops." I shit you not, that was a censor. They couldn't reference death either. Yet they tried this whole edgy story with a lot of drama that didn't work because of that. Spectacular, from an all-creative standpoint got Spider-Man right. Spider-Man started off in high school, and actually looked like a high schooler. He has his quips which were awesome in the comics and were great here. Spider-Man was allowed to punch people. It took things from all universes like Ultimate and the movie a bit, but Greg Weisman said he really wanted to focus on the Lee/Ditko and Lee/Romita versions of the story. It had a really good plot with character development. It just had everything the 90's series wanted to do and did it 100X better. Especially since Greg Weisman and Victor Cook were manning then helm. All shows they do are excellent and this was no excuse. Sure, it couldn't say die, but no kids shows these days really do that. But really, Spectacular was just an overall better package. It had a great story, animation, use of the source material, voice acting, and it's creative team. Sure, it gets a lot of flack for it's animation, but the reason they used that is so Spider-Man could have a lot of fluid movements to make it look really good and no stiff fighting scenes. I must say, they accomplished just that. Really, I think this show deserves so much more than the 90's series. Sure, you can have nostalgia. But don't go so far as to say it's better because it was what you watched. It tried dark elements but failed because of how much it was censored. Spectacular was able to do it since it wasn't as restrained as the 90's series. Also, for any of you wondering, Greg Weisman has a website where you can ask him questions. He responded to one as to why Spectacular was cancelled and it's a bit different then we all think: http://s8.org/gargoyles/askgreg/search.php?qid=14223
There's the link if you're interested.

So, again, I stress. If you haven't watched it or just want to play the nostalgia card, you should probably reconsider your post because it's a bad argument to use those two reasons.

I really liked both series, but the 90's cartoon was just so much bigger. Hell, I don't even see Spider-Man action figures in the toy sections anymore. If the 2008 series was that big, they would have sold some more toys.

I'm watching the 90s one on Marvel.com right now. It's awesome.

I've seen a few episodes of Spectacular, it's pretty cool. The Venom fight was really good. But why does Peter have a big mole? It really bothers me

Totally expected the results to be the opposite. Everyone hates the crazy fast pace of Spiderman 94 but thats what was so awesome about it. He does use his powers a bit more creatively in the other versions than 94 though where he mostly just jumps and punches.

Also 'hipster spiderman' (2003 version) as I call it was quite good, once you get over how really weird it is.

The new 'Amazing spiderman' looks really lame.

90s Spider-Man was pretty awful. I didn't like it much then and I like it even less as an adult. It was something to watch, and that's about it.

no, I take it back. Sometimes it was so-bad-it's-freaking-hilarious.

Spectacular was awesome. Sadly, I don't see us getting a Spider-Man cartoon that good any time soon.

Teimuraz:
.

I watched both and wish spectacular had more of a chance, as the only thing I didnt like about it were how the noses were drawn.....and maybe the eyes, other than that that series was perfect.

Dont really care for the newest one, ultimate or whatever.

I've seen some episodes of both series (not very long ago), and I prefer Spectacular Spider-Man.

My problem with the '94 cartoon is that it feels clunky and rushed. The art is okay but not that well-animated. But what bothers me more is that the pacing is really rushed. It feels like the VAs are trying to rush out all of their dialogue to match the frenetic pace of the action. I don't mean that they talk quickly, necessarily; I mean that often times as soon as one line ends, the next line (especially if spoken by someone else) begins before any of us can take it in. And there's so much crammed into a single episode that viewers might feel confused.

With Spectacular Spider-Man, the art and animation are very clean, and I prefer the skinnier Peter Parker in this one to the more muscular / blocky Spider Man from the '94 cartoon. Whatever's happening in each episode, it's also a little easier to digest it than the old cartoon. Yeah, this one had episodes composed in arcs like Spider Man '94, but it didn't feel like an overload of information, and even within the arcs, we had a self-contained story (or two) for each episode.

I like both cartoons, but I enjoy Spectacular more. I grew up with the 90s show, it introduced me to Spidey's world, but I'm not gonna let nostalgia cloud my judegment.(which I honestly think is the reason people praise it so much) It doesn't hold up that well rewatching it as an adult. It's heavily flawed. The animation started getting pretty sloppy in the second season. Stiff character movement and they almost always recycled footage. Which become so obvious that it's cringe worthy sometimes. Especially when you see the characters in environments that look nothing like the setting they were just in. Certain villains were handled poorly. Norman Osborn and Doc Ock for instance. Spidey's two biggest foes reduced to grunts under Kingpin's thumb. Morbius was also overused.

The fight scenes were also pretty lacking as well due to censorship. Punching wasn't allowed, Spidey almost never used his surroundings and there was nothing but throwing, throwing things at each other, grappling, bear hugs, and light kicks that only lasted for about a minute. The show also made Spidey weak when it came to taking a hit. He gets shoved into a wall once by Rhino or swing into a statue by Carnage and is out cold?

Despite these and other flaws I have, the show still has things going for it. Animation in episodes like Night Of The Lizard was great. The character designs were good, the voice acting was great(although CDB did overact at times), and there's some real quality episodes in there. Especially from the first three seasons. And I actually like that Black Cat better than the one from Spectacular. Can't go wrong with Jennifer Hale.

In Spectacular, the designs weren't the best, but they allowed for much smoother animation and pretty good action sequences. I'd say that's a trade-off. The characters move better than they did in TAS, Spidey moves more fluidly and faster than he did in any other cartoon. Plus he actually fights his foes and takes beatings as depicted in the comics. Character development was also great. Gwen was part of the cast for the first time. MJ was the cool party girl. Flash develops into a person and many characters shine. Spidey has the supporting cast and this show was the first to use them. Each character was developed enough that Peter didn't have to be there for there to be a story.

The villains were handled better as well. I liked how a lot them were introduced before their superpowered episode. Norman was potrayed closer to how he was in the comics. A cold, calculating, ruthless businessman whom rarely expresses fear. In a mere two seasons they did several of Doc Ock's best stories from the comics. The Sinister Six, The Master Planner and the Gang War. Amazing accomplishment and more than TAS ever did with Doc Ock in their full five seasons. Venom was more sinister and actually felt more of threat. He came closer to accomplishing his goal more than TAS Venom did. I do admit TAS Venom had the better voice though.

It's a shame the show was canceled so soon. As the show was critically acclaimed and NOT canceled due to bad ratings(people who say this are talking out of their asses) Had it not been for Disney buying out Marvel causing Sony to loses the rights to the show, it would have been on it's fifth season right now. The producers even had some DTVs planned after the series was over, which would have had Peter in high school and contained darker stores. Possibly killing Gwen off.

Despite how the art style looks and what haters will say, Spectacular isn't a show that's just for kids. It was catered to kids as well as an older audience. Just like Spider-man TAS, Batman TAS, X-men TAS, and Gargoyles. If it was JUST for kids then it wouldn't have been heavy on story and action. Wouldn't have had sexual innuendos. Wouldn't have themes like a character's drug addiction or a character having a heart attack. The fight scenes wouldn't been as brutal as they were. And it wouldn't have had death threats such as "Impale his heart with your horn."

Well the '94 ones made up my childhood.

And the '08 cartoons made up my little brother's childhood. :P

For the sake of nostalgia, I say the 1994 ones. But, truth be told, I like the 2008 ones. They're awesome and the voice acting is fantastic.

game-lover:
I'm not voting because I was rather fond of both equally.

But I laugh at those who said Spectacular Spider-Man was more mature than Spider-Man of the 90's. Like seriously?? I don't believe that.

Spectacular Spider-Man was more of the way that the current Ultimate Spider-Man show on Disney XD. Lighter, more fun. That type. With a mix of dark in between just right.

90's Spider-Man was a bit darker. Predominantly. Hardly any humor at all. And way too much angsty Peter Parker at times. The bad guys were a little badder, everyone looked older and yadda, yadda, yadda.

You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. The 90's series was censored so hard. Spider-Man could hardly do shit in the 90's series. He couldn't punch anyone, he could never take a beating, and he just wasn't Spider-Man. In SSM, they did everything right the 90's series did wrong. They got Norman Osborn to be an actual cold hearted business man instead of just being some guy who works for Kingpin and is Green Goblin. Doctor Octopus had a much better story arc, with his Sinister Six story arc, and his Master Planner arc, which the 90's series can't fucking touch. SSM was nothing like USM and you saying that clearly shows you never watched SSM. USM flat out treats it's audience like morons and breaks the fourth wall constantly while SSM did none of that and only had Peter inner monologue about what's happened which didn't require breaking the fourth wall. SSM mixed what was the original Lee/Ditko and Lee/Romita arcs together along with other versions of Spider-Man like the Ultimate comic universe and some of the movie universe. It was also less censored and Spider-Man could actually punch someone and quipped his enemies, you know, like in the comics, instead of just fucking throwing them or webbing them and not offering a single witty line in the 90's series. Hey, here's an idea game lover, why don't you actually look up the characters source material and actually understand the character and how their story has elements of light-heartedness and doesn't always have to be dark at times. The 90's series tried that and fucking failed exponentially since it was censored, as I've already mentioned and they couldn't reference death or do anything Spectacular was able to do. Kinda like how SSM had death threats like "Or simply impale his heart on your horn." TAS couldn't do that at all since FOX wouldn't let them. But of course your response will be summed up as this "90'S NOSTALGIA IS CLEARLY A GOOD REASON TO PREFER SOMETHING INSTEAD OF ACTUALLY FAIRLY JUDGING SOMETHING!" I look forward to reading your nostalgia driven response. Oh, and before you throw the argument of nostalgia back at me, I did grow up with the 90's series too. Spectacular came on and I knew that one was a thousand times better. I just, you know, tend to not let nostalgia cloud my judgement.

ShadowDude112:

game-lover:
I'm not voting because I was rather fond of both equally.

But I laugh at those who said Spectacular Spider-Man was more mature than Spider-Man of the 90's. Like seriously?? I don't believe that.

Spectacular Spider-Man was more of the way that the current Ultimate Spider-Man show on Disney XD. Lighter, more fun. That type. With a mix of dark in between just right.

90's Spider-Man was a bit darker. Predominantly. Hardly any humor at all. And way too much angsty Peter Parker at times. The bad guys were a little badder, everyone looked older and yadda, yadda, yadda.

You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. The 90's series was censored so hard. Spider-Man could hardly do shit in the 90's series. He couldn't punch anyone, he could never take a beating, and he just wasn't Spider-Man. In SSM, they did everything right the 90's series did wrong. They got Norman Osborn to be an actual cold hearted business man instead of just being some guy who works for Kingpin and is Green Goblin. Doctor Octopus had a much better story arc, with his Sinister Six story arc, and his Master Planner arc, which the 90's series can't fucking touch. SSM was nothing like USM and you saying that clearly shows you never watched SSM. USM flat out treats it's audience like morons and breaks the fourth wall constantly while SSM did none of that and only had Peter inner monologue about what's happened which didn't require breaking the fourth wall. SSM mixed what was the original Lee/Ditko and Lee/Romita arcs together along with other versions of Spider-Man like the Ultimate comic universe and some of the movie universe. It was also less censored and Spider-Man could actually punch someone and quipped his enemies, you know, like in the comics, instead of just fucking throwing them or webbing them and not offering a single witty line in the 90's series. Hey, here's an idea game lover, why don't you actually look up the characters source material and actually understand the character and how their story has elements of light-heartedness and doesn't always have to be dark at times. The 90's series tried that and fucking failed exponentially since it was censored, as I've already mentioned and they couldn't reference death or do anything Spectacular was able to do. Kinda like how SSM had death threats like "Or simply impale his heart on your horn." TAS couldn't do that at all since FOX wouldn't let them. But of course your response will be summed up as this "90'S NOSTALGIA IS CLEARLY A GOOD REASON TO PREFER SOMETHING INSTEAD OF ACTUALLY FAIRLY JUDGING SOMETHING!" I look forward to reading your nostalgia driven response. Oh, and before you throw the argument of nostalgia back at me, I did grow up with the 90's series too. Spectacular came on and I knew that one was a thousand times better. I just, you know, tend to not let nostalgia cloud my judgement.

You know what would be a better way to get your assholish statements across? Paragraphs. They are your friend. *nods* That being said:

All right... so The Animated series was censored to hell and back while Spectacular Spider-Man wasn't. So? What does that have to do maturity?

I have watched Spectacular Spider-Man. If I hadn't, I wouldn't have mentioned it. Ultimate Spider-Man is considerably lighter than both of them. Yeah, duh. I get that. Fourth wall breaking. Funny jokes. All that jazz. But SSM focused a lot more on Peter in high school. Worrying about prom. Having his aunt possibly set him up on a blind date and conversing with Harry about how she's probably ugly because Aunt May only described her as having a great personality. Eddie Brock was one of his fucking best friends instead of just some dude. USM is also more about his high school life.

The animated series did not. He was already at the Daily Bugle by then. Doing more of the love triangle thing with Felicia and Mary Jane. Maybe it's not more mature by a wide margin. But it is a little bit more.

Oh and here's your idea. How about you don't make ignorant statements about my opinion being based on nostalgia. I grew up with both series same as you. I know the theme song by heart even though there weren't exactly many lyrics to memorize.

Plus, I NEVER said one was better than the other. If you'd read, you'd have clearly seen I said that I wasn't voting because I was fond of BOTH EQUALLY. You know what that means? It means I consider them equal in enjoyment and entertainment. Equal. You know... No preference?

You're sitting here going on about how the 90s series sucks and SSM is better. As if I was saying otherwise. I wasn't. Even if you believe the latter is more mature, I'm not saying mature is better. Because you know what, it isn't. I watch Ultimate Spider-Man. A show that isn't mature but that I enjoy. Because it doesn't matter, really. And if that show was on this poll to vote for which show was better, I still wouldn't vote with the same reason I'm using now.

Because I love them all and couldn't possibly decide.

game-lover:

ShadowDude112:

game-lover:
I'm not voting because I was rather fond of both equally.

But I laugh at those who said Spectacular Spider-Man was more mature than Spider-Man of the 90's. Like seriously?? I don't believe that.

Spectacular Spider-Man was more of the way that the current Ultimate Spider-Man show on Disney XD. Lighter, more fun. That type. With a mix of dark in between just right.

90's Spider-Man was a bit darker. Predominantly. Hardly any humor at all. And way too much angsty Peter Parker at times. The bad guys were a little badder, everyone looked older and yadda, yadda, yadda.

You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. The 90's series was censored so hard. Spider-Man could hardly do shit in the 90's series. He couldn't punch anyone, he could never take a beating, and he just wasn't Spider-Man. In SSM, they did everything right the 90's series did wrong. They got Norman Osborn to be an actual cold hearted business man instead of just being some guy who works for Kingpin and is Green Goblin. Doctor Octopus had a much better story arc, with his Sinister Six story arc, and his Master Planner arc, which the 90's series can't fucking touch. SSM was nothing like USM and you saying that clearly shows you never watched SSM. USM flat out treats it's audience like morons and breaks the fourth wall constantly while SSM did none of that and only had Peter inner monologue about what's happened which didn't require breaking the fourth wall. SSM mixed what was the original Lee/Ditko and Lee/Romita arcs together along with other versions of Spider-Man like the Ultimate comic universe and some of the movie universe. It was also less censored and Spider-Man could actually punch someone and quipped his enemies, you know, like in the comics, instead of just fucking throwing them or webbing them and not offering a single witty line in the 90's series. Hey, here's an idea game lover, why don't you actually look up the characters source material and actually understand the character and how their story has elements of light-heartedness and doesn't always have to be dark at times. The 90's series tried that and fucking failed exponentially since it was censored, as I've already mentioned and they couldn't reference death or do anything Spectacular was able to do. Kinda like how SSM had death threats like "Or simply impale his heart on your horn." TAS couldn't do that at all since FOX wouldn't let them. But of course your response will be summed up as this "90'S NOSTALGIA IS CLEARLY A GOOD REASON TO PREFER SOMETHING INSTEAD OF ACTUALLY FAIRLY JUDGING SOMETHING!" I look forward to reading your nostalgia driven response. Oh, and before you throw the argument of nostalgia back at me, I did grow up with the 90's series too. Spectacular came on and I knew that one was a thousand times better. I just, you know, tend to not let nostalgia cloud my judgement.

You know what would be a better way to get your assholish statements across? Paragraphs. They are your friend. *nods* That being said:

All right... so The Animated series was censored to hell and back while Spectacular Spider-Man wasn't. So? What does that have to do maturity?

I have watched Spectacular Spider-Man. If I hadn't, I wouldn't have mentioned it. Ultimate Spider-Man is considerably lighter than both of them. Yeah, duh. I get that. Fourth wall breaking. Funny jokes. All that jazz. But SSM focused a lot more on Peter in high school. Worrying about prom. Having his aunt possibly set him up on a blind date and conversing with Harry about how she's probably ugly because Aunt May only described her as having a great personality. Eddie Brock was one of his fucking best friends instead of just some dude. USM is also more about his high school life.

The animated series did not. He was already at the Daily Bugle by then. Doing more of the love triangle thing with Felicia and Mary Jane. Maybe it's not more mature by a wide margin. But it is a little bit more.

Oh and here's your idea. How about you don't make ignorant statements about my opinion being based on nostalgia. I grew up with both series same as you. I know the theme song by heart even though there weren't exactly many lyrics to memorize.

Plus, I NEVER said one was better than the other. If you'd read, you'd have clearly seen I said that I wasn't voting because I was fond of BOTH EQUALLY. You know what that means? It means I consider them equal in enjoyment and entertainment. Equal. You know... No preference?

You're sitting here going on about how the 90s series sucks and SSM is better. As if I was saying otherwise. I wasn't. Even if you believe the latter is more mature, I'm not saying mature is better. Because you know what, it isn't. I watch Ultimate Spider-Man. A show that isn't mature but that I enjoy. Because it doesn't matter, really. And if that show was on this poll to vote for which show was better, I still wouldn't vote with the same reason I'm using now.

Because I love them all and couldn't possibly decide.

If you really didn't like the fact that it was about Peter being in high school then you clearly don't know Spider-Man and how it started. Peter Parker was in high school when the comics started. Sure, some characters like Gwen, MJ, and Harry didn't appear until after Peter was out of high school, but the fact still stands that Greg Weisman and Victor Cook actually knew what they were doing when they were producing this show. It doesn't make sense for any Spider-Man show to just start Peter with the job at the Bugle. Even in the early comics he didn't get the job right away. He started off as a freelance photographer and slowly got the job. Huh, kinda like SSM. Along with that, Eddie Brock being Peter's best friend is taken from the Ultimate Spider-Man comic book where they were childhood best friends. They used that, in my own educated guess, to set up his character for the season one finale. It worked out really well too. I know I said this before, but you should really do some fact checking before you make assumptions like Eddie Brock being some random guy in all continuities.

Look, you can like both shows equally. But as a comic book fan and seeing something that's truly as close as possible to the source material and by an all creative stand point, it was the best adaptation of Spider-Man. Ever... so far. Sure, if you like the 90's series that's cool. Whatever. But if you flat out say SSM wasn't Spider-Man, and wasn't like the comics, I will comic fanboy on you so hard. Sure, you didn't say that, but you certainly said in your first post in the thread that the 90's series carried out villains being badder, etc. isn't exactly the best thing though. Sure, you can assume it's better but really, the way it was conveyed in the 90's series wasn't good. Especially because everything just happened to have the Kingpin involved in some way and every bad guy being Spider-Man. In the comics, there was a broader way things worked than just Kingpin and every bad guy being Spider-Man. Because, apparently Morbius who looks nothing like Spider-Man is some how thought to be Spider-Man is just beyond me and is the dumbest thing ever.

I will give you one thing though, you spell Spider-Man with a hyphen and that gets props in my book.

 

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked