The more things change… Amazing Spider-Man (Vol. 1) #92 Published: c. October, 1970? Cover Date: January, 1971 “When Iceman Attacks” Writer: Stan Lee Artist: Gil Kane Inker: John Romita Letterer: Artie Simek
Not a great way to start the day! Amazing Spider-Man (Vol. 1) #204 Published: c. February, 1980? Cover Date: May, 1980 “The Black Cat Always Lands on Her Feet!” Writer: Marv Wolfman Artist: Keith Pollard […]
Happy birthday to Sal Buscema, who also had a birthday last week! Peter Parker, the Spectacular Spider-Man (Vol. 1) #1 Published: c. September, 1976? Cover Date: December, 1976 “Twice Stings the Tarantula!” Writer: Gerry Conway […]
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
@hornacek
Okay
It’s always weird to see Peter actually get hurt by a non-powered person, though I guess in this case we can just say he let himself get hit and acted like he was hurt to conceal his identity.
@Alex
With the utmost politeness, I have zero interest in discussing this any further. I’ve said my opinion multiple times, I have nothing more to say about this.
@hornacek, With the utmost politness, I must decline your offer to agree to disagreeing.
What Ned thinks happened or didn’t happen is not one and the same with what really occurred.
But given how this topic has revealed itself as lengthy, again, out of respect of the OP and everyone else on the front page, we can continue with with PMs on the messageboard. I think that’s fairer on everyone rather than debating back and forth on the front page.
@Alex
Agree to disagree here. In my opinion, as I’ve already explained, it is clear from what we’re shown (and what we’re not shown) that Peter and Betty had sex after she came back from her honeymoon.
As for this panel, Ned’s wife left him on his honeymoon, he finds Peter and Betty embracing each other, he punches Peter, and threatens to kill him. I think it’s pretty clear that if Ned thinks either (a) they’ve had sex after she left him, or (b) if they haven’t already had sex they would have if Ned hadn’t returned.
@hornacek check your PMs on the Mb dude
But for the record being upset with Peter over his relationship with Betty doesn’t prove nor disprove anything really.
Wow, Ned is really upset at Peter. I wonder what Peter did to make him so angry. 🙂