Today, we’re going back to where it all began:
I hate to make light of such a serious situation, but… Peter, you done goofed!
Amazing Fantasy (Vol. 1) #15
Published: c. June, 1962?
Cover Date: August, 1962
“Spider-Man!”
Writer: Stan Lee
Artist: Steve Ditko
Inker: Steve Ditko
Letterer: Artie Simek
I’m not sure if that creepy smile would reassure me. Amazing Spider-Man (Vol. 1) #374 Published: c. December, 1992? Cover Date: February, 1993 “Murder on Parade” Writer: David Michelinie Artist: Mark Bagley Inker: Randy Emberlin […]
Stan “Big-Hearted” Lee. Amazing Spider-Man (Vol. 1) #20 Published: c. November, 1964? Cover Date: January, 1965 “The Coming of the Scorpion!” Or: “Spidey Battles Scorpey!” Writer: Stan Lee Artist: Steve Ditko Inker: Steve Ditko Letterer: […]
I think we all know by now that you don’t want to make an enemy of Spidey when he’s angry! Peter Parker, the Spectacular Spider-Man (Vol. 1) #3 Published: c. November, 1976? Cover Date: February, […]
on Panel of the Day #1615 (Splash Page Sunday!): “@Hornacek – Maybe Stan reserved the writer credit for himself.” Nov 18, 08:01
on Panel of the Day #1615 (Splash Page Sunday!): “In these older issues, why is the writer sometimes listed as “Scripter”? Is this like in a movie credits where…” Nov 17, 09:09 on Panel of the Day #1615 (Splash Page Sunday!): “I mean, eventually he’ll fall enough that he can web onto a building. This isn’t that dire a situation. Now…” Nov 17, 09:08 on Panel of the Day #1612 (Splash Page Sunday!): “I guess there was something different about Cindy Moon’s body chemistry, too.” Nov 11, 08:15 on Panel of the Day #1612 (Splash Page Sunday!): “I don’t like the whole “something was different with Peter’s body chemistry” explanation here. He was bitten by a spider…” Nov 11, 04:30
on 1994 Spider-Man #15: “Battle of the Insidious Six” Review: “Your complaints look like nitpicks and made-up. Why angry face should be indicative of seeing stone crushed?” Nov 10, 14:28 on Panel of the Day #1611: “I might be in the minority, but I’ve always been confused about Spider-man Noir’s wielding a gun.” Nov 8, 09:36 on Craig’s Critique: Amazing Spider-Man #60 (Legacy #954): “Hit The Road, Zeb” or “All [REDACTED] Things Must Come To An End”: “@Paul Penna: I just don’t see any future writer “doing” anything with Paul besides having him around. Marvel wants him…” Nov 6, 09:19 on Panel(s) of the Day #1610 (Mary Jane Monday!): “@Hornacek — I would make a horrible Spider-man. So many times, were I in his place, I would have confided…” Nov 5, 07:53 on Panel(s) of the Day #1610 (Mary Jane Monday!): “At least he said “I have to go take photos for the Bugle.” This is a valid excuse since this…” Nov 5, 04:26
Apple Podcasts
Google Podcasts
Spotify
Pandora
Amazon Music
iHeartRadio
Podbean
Amazon Alexa
Player.fm
Listen Notes
Stitcher
Even as a child, reading that for the first time; it hit me in the guts.
Classic.
@William: Now that I think about it, I think I’d like it if more artists did the half-mask thing to show his emotions while fully masked instead of making the eyes expressive.
I have always wondered about the dots in his eyes.
I always find the image of Spidey with dots in his eyes weirdly creepy. It also takes away a little from the pure elegance of Ditko’s Spidey look. I completely get the logic of using them to show shock more clearly, though changing the shapes of the eyes or doing the half-mask face turned out to be the much better option.
Either way, a great reveal in one of the best comics of all time. Of course, now we all know the origin incredibly well, but at the time this would’ve been an amazing twist.
@Chi-Town: Yeah, I’m pretty sure that’s why the dots are in the eyes.
I’ve noticed that some reprints have them removed. Maybe whoever was in charge at the time thought they were some kind of art mistake.
The moment he learned the power lesson in life. Did Steve Ditko put two dots on the white eyes to express the “Shocked” look?