I never buy comics out of a sense of nostalgia, but Superman vs. Spider-man is the exception that disproves the rule. Of this recent spate of '70s TE reprints, I buy only the ones I never had or those I somehow lost track of over the years. Yet I bought this one, even though I still have the original, just for the opportunity to read it on better paper stock. Yes, it has been reprinted at least twice on better paper stock (and yes, I have both of those), but this is the first time it's been reprinted on better paper stock and at full size.
To be perfectly honest, I wasn't all that impressed by the original in 1976. I was intrigued, sure, but the end result was less than spectacular. For one thing, I didn't become a fan of Ross Andru's artwork until 2012. Now that I have grown to appreciate it (thanks to an essay written by the TE's writer, Gerry Conway), I'm looking forward to reading it again. And next month (February 4th, to be precise), I'll be able to buy Supes & Spidey's second team-up guilt free because I have only the regular size '90s reprints.
Replies
I shouldn't comment any further, having done my fanboy whinge on Ross Andru already. It's a subjective thing, and I had my say, and Andru fans are entirely entitled to enjoy and celebrate their boy, without me raining on their parade.
That being said ...
I agree with both of you, Jeff and CK. I found Ditko to be weird and interesting, and sometimes weirdly interesting, but what made me a Spider-Man fan was the Lee/Romita period. Obviously, I do not consider any period with Andru/Esposito on art to be "the most consistently excellent period of Spidey's career." Some may, and more power to them. But as for me, I tolerated the book during that period, waiting for a new artist more to my taste. And the writing -- I don't know who it was, probably Gerry Conway, maybe some other Bronze Agers -- did NOT hit the same high points that Stan Lee did during the Romita era. (Which, incidentally, is a rebuttal to those who like to call Stan Lee "Jack Kirby's stenographer." Or Ditko's. The Lee/Romita period, which sloshed over into the Lee/Gil Kane period, was pretty much all Lee on the typewriter, and my favorite Spidey run ever. Lee understood Peter Parker, whereas Ditko kept trying to turn him into a conservative.)
I don't even remember who took over after Andru/Eposito. There were a lot of them, I think, and I doubtless liked some of them better, and maybe some of them worse. But I can't think of an outstanding period in Amazing Spider-Man after Lee/Romita/Kane. Or even a sustained period by anybody after Andru/Esposito. I continued reading the book into where it was canceled the first time. (Somewhere in the 440s? Something about Norman Osborn getting some mystical artifacts? Wasn't Aunt May dead then? I dunno. Whatever. It was a long time ago, and not that interesting.) When I look back on 50 years of Amazing Spider-Man, the only era I remember with unadulterated fanboy love is Lee/Romita/Kane.
Oh, and you're right, too, Dave Palmer: Andru/Esposito were born to do Metal Men. Robert Kanigher, too. And, really, nobody else could do it. Once that trio left, every effort by anyone else to revive the series just didn't work. There was some sort of alchemy there that wasn't replicable by anyone else.
I mentioned at the top of this thread that I didn't begin to appreciate Andru's art until after I read Gerry Conway's introduction to MMW Spider-Man v14 (which reprints #132-142, smack in the middle of "most consistently excellent period of Spidey's career"). In it, Conway wrote: "Ross's ability to track a fight sequence across a realistically designed landscape, and never leave the reader confused abiout what was happeneing, to whom, and where, was unparalleled... Going beyond action, Ross was also a teriffic stage manager of dramatic, character-based sequences... Another of ross's strengths on Amasing Spider-Man was his ability to place Spidey in a city that was clearly and specifically New York." Conway went on to cite specific examples from the volume highlighting each of those strengths.
But perhaps the most telling part of the introduction was Conway's theory as to why Andru is not as well-remembered as Ditko, Romita (Sr. and Jr.), MacFarlane, Bagley. It's because his work was cartoony: "For all his strengths as a storyteller, for all his efforts to make Spidey's surroundings authentic, Ross was a cartoonist at a time when techncal ability as a draftsman was beginning to becaome more important to fans than an artist's skill at creating memorable visual sequences. Comic book art styles in the early and mid-1970s were moving away from Jack Kirby and toward Neal Adams. Away from cartoon expressionism and toward dramatic realism. Some artists were able to successfully stradle both approaches (John Byrne and George Perez come to mind) but others ended up moving from one extreme to the other. Ross was at the cartoony end of the spectrum at a time when general tastes were moving in the other direction."
That sounds right to me.
It also explains why so many feel that Andru and Esposito were "born to do Metal Men."
"My recollection of this is that it wasn't bad, but that I liked the second one better."
"I preferred the first one-- maybe it was the novelty-- but the second one had a more interesting plot."
I have no feelings of nostalgia toward this one whatsoever. It was reprinted twice in the '90s, once as a standalone and once as part of a tpb, but it never occurred to me to rank the two Supes/Spidey crossovers until the Baron and JD brought it up last week. Now that I am thinking specifically along those lines, it is clear to me that the second is objectively superior (novelty notwithstanding). The first had a perfunctory "bare bones" plot, designed only to move the characters around the board. The second's plot had more characterization and more motovation, and was much more "Marvel" than it was "DC." It was written by Jim Shooter, Penciled by John Buscema and inked by Joe Sinnott. It had no fewer than nine inkers, all of whom worked primarily or exclusively for Marvel: Terry Austin, Klaus Janson, Bob McCleod, Al Milgrom, Steve Leialoha, WaltSimonson, Bob Layton, Joe Rubenstein and Bob Wiacek. It was also edited by Al Milgrom. Marv Wolfman was credited "for plot suggestions." The only wholly "DC guy" in the credits was (co-)consulting editor Joe Orlando, but he was balanced by Len Wein.
This is very much more like DC characters who wandered into a Marvel comic than the other way around. The Hulk and Wonder Woman also appear. I was familiar with the post-Crisis Parasite, but this was my first inkling that the character existed pre-Crisis. Speaking of Parasite, couldn't DC have found a more "heavyweight" character to counterbalance Doctor Doom? They already used Lex Luthor in the first one, and Superman's rogue's gallery has always been on the light side. The only other villain that springs readily to mind would be Braniac, but I have no idea why Dr. Doom would "team-up" with him. (The Joker? Nah!) I once used Doom's soliloquy from pp.4-5 in ther "Place that Prose!" thread (anyone here remember that?).
That gives us one vote for #1 and two votes (possibly more) for #2.
Anyone else?
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next