The Amazing Spider-Man #3

 "Is this the end of Spider-Man?"

Once again we see why The Amazing Spider-Man is absolutely the flagship title in these early years. It's got fun, it's got action- but, with Peter Parker's youthful angst, this issue is a proper character study and that gives it a level of depth that, as of Spring 1963, no other Marvel title quite has.

It's only issue #3 and, as such, it's fun to see a few firsts. We have the first use of what will become known as the Spidey Signal. We have the first use of the title "Daily Bugle", with J. Jonah Jameson still said to be "publisher". And, of course, we have the introduction of Doctor Octopus, or Otto Octavius, who is both an absolutely top tier Spidey baddie and Marvel's foremost example of nominative determinism.

It's the early '60s, so Doc Ock's origin story absolutely has to involve exposure to large amounts of radiation, which is very much in fashion for origin stories at this point, and probably not exactly a good thing for Doc Ock's health a couple of decades down the line.

We never really learn exactly what Doc Ock plans to do with the atomic plant that he seizes, but that isn't the point here- the point is the self-confidence of our talented but very young hero, whose crisis of confidence after his initial defeat to Doc Ock is extremely well handled. It's perfect how it should be a school pep talk by an unwitting Human Torch (who responds to Peter's enthusiastic thanks with a casual "Huh? Oh, sure, sure! Glad you enjoyed it, fella!") that galvanises Spider-Man to defeat Doc Ock with a combination of both the cleverness and the perseverance that we will come to know him for... and, incidentally, Steve Ditko is really good at showing his determined persistence.

Another thing again worth mentioning is that, so far, we've had no real strong sense that this is all occurring in a shared universe. So far it's been like DC of the time- crossovers happen, yes, but there isn't really a rigorously maintained continuity. But it's still very early, and there's no need to define things yet. But I'll note that, after the appearance of the Fantastic Four in The Amazing Spider-Man #1 and the use of the Hulk in Fantastic Four #12, Johnny Storm's cameo appearance here gives us a hat trick of crossovers.

That digression aside, though, this is as good as it gets for early '60s Marvel. 

The Amazing Spider-Man #2

 "Take a bonus and go out and buy yourself some twist records!"

While not as exceptionally good, or as groundbreaking, as its predecessor, this second issue is nevertheless impressive (despite the silly science- "anti-magnetic inverter" indeed!). It rather helps that, unlike second string villains like the Chameleon (or indeed the Tinkerer!), there's something quite compelling about the Vulture, our first proper Spidey villain, right from the start.

Most interesting, though, is how this issue continues to set and shape the status quo, with Peter earning money through selling photos to J. Jonah Jameson. Interesting, though, is that there is as yet no mention of the Daily Bugle, although Now Magazine is introduced. And Jonah seems to be not so much an editor but the owner of "Jameson Publications", with editors working under him and a massive building with his name on it. It's also fun to see Peter adjusting his costume now that it's to be used for superheroics rather than for entertainment.

The Tinkerer story is a little odd- generic alien invasions really don't feel right with this title- but it's decent enough. More than the stories themselves, though, there's already a feeling that Spider-Man's environment is very grounded and well thought through. 

The Amazing Spider-Man #1

 "Everything I do as Spider-Man seems to turn out wrong!"

Wow. The contrast from the last issue in the Order is as huge as it could possibly be. Yes, it's still melodrama. And yes, up to a point (Steve Ditko being Steve Ditko) there's certainly a whiff of Ayn Rand's dodgy "philosophy". But this is sheer quality, an absolute triumph, easily the best thing Marvel have done up to this point. 

This is Marvel really doubling down on the "superhero with problems" thing- right from the start the issue really emphasises Peter Parker's angst. He's mourning Uncle Ben, but without Ben's salary he and his Aunt May are facing serious problems in paying the bills... and the sheer sense of angst and despair is superbly shown in Ditko's exceptional rendering of a desperate, frustrated Peter.

He's is an impossible moral dilemma- he needs to look after his Aunt May, dismisses the very thought of crime, and resolves to perform again... but in a delicious touch, one can't cash a cheque without a real identity!

Things get worse as journalist (not yet explicitly an editor) J. Jonah Jameson turns the public against him. And, just to twist the knife even further, Jameson doubles down on this as Spider-Man saves his (not yet vulpine!) hero astronaut son. The unfairness just gets worse and worse. And continues into the next story, where his desperate financial situation again takes centre stage. He angrily abandons plans to join the Fantastic Four when he learns that there's no salary on offer... which, as we've previously discussed. Even new generic villain the Chameleon (to become a minor part of his rogues gallery) knows of and exploits his poverty.

All this, of course, is very Ditko, with his hard right and wrong, Mr. A, Objectivist obsessiveness. But here, with the ideology not overt. it really works. This is a truly winning formula- a superhero with real, substantive angst.

And it feels, at this point, that we really do have a shared audience. Not just because of the FF's cameo, but because of Peter's rueful comment that other superheroes, like the FF and Ant-Man, don't seem to have problems like he does!

The Amazing Spider-Man (1977 TV Pilot)

 "Maybe I wanna ask him where he buys his webs?"

I was expecting something corny and silly when I decided to watch the 1977 TV pilot with Nicholas Hammond; something not necessarily very good but fun to point and laugh at. I mean, look at the '70s hair and bell bottoms, right?

Except... this is actually a pretty solid, wll-written TV pilot with a strong script, impressively directed and with particularly impressive use of incidental music. Nicholas Hammond is a pretty good Peter Parker and, while the performances are a little kids' TV, I'm rather impressed with this.

Not that this is The Sopranos, of course, or that it necessarily aspires to be anything more than a bit of action and adventure. But the script is pacy and well- structured, with exposition nicely integrated into the action throughout and that familiar origin nicely, and quickly, done, with a glowing radioactive spider allowed to wander off and bite whomever else it so wishes.

We have Jonah, Robbie Robertson and Aunt May, although May and Peter's house is perhaps a little too large for a supposedly poor family. Spidey's wisecracking may be absent here, but the costume is good and Spidey's powers made to look cool. Hammond's Peter is endearingly dorky. He seems to get a love interest, Judy, so presumably no Mary Jane or Gwen Stacy. There's a comedy police detective, too, who works surprisingly well.

There are no supervillains, as such, as usul with 70s superhero adaptations, although one can see the argument that supervillains tend not to look good on screen. Yet the baddie we have here- a kind of evil mindfulness counsellor with the most 70s suit of all time- is pretty cool, using his 70s computer and hypnotised 70s martial arts people to hypnotise upstanding members of society into robbing banks. It's a solid, fascinatig plot, well-structured and exciting to watch.

This is far from the silly bit of low camp I was expecting, and certainly far better than that silly 60s cartoon. I'm impressed, and may blog the series at some point. This is good stuff.

The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)

"I'm having woman cramps..."

Meh. Is that it? That was decidedly, boringly average, but then this is 2012 and Sony have to crank out any old Spider-Man film every few years. Still, those of us who have seen Fox's 2015 Fantastic Four know it could be much worse.

Not that this is a bad film, you understand. It's well-shot, adequately plotted and scripted, Andrew Garfield is a good-enough Spider-Man in spite of being blatantly too old, and the whole "cross-species" thing is a clever way of tying together the origins of Spidey and the Lizard. No; what's annoying is that they're doing that damn origin again, and Sam Raimi made that film in 2002.

Oh, they try to make things different- there's an emphasis on Spidey's dead parents. We get Gwen Stacy and Mary Jane and there's a twist at the end where he seems to decide not to dump her for her "own safety" after a promise to her dad in which two men agree her future between them. Patriarchy much? Still, at least this time it's subverted, even if the trope of Peter Parker's girlfriend always being a character integral to the plot is becoming a little groanworthy. We also get a more streetwise, skateboarding Peter whose academic geekery is downplayed, in spite of the fact that this time we get actual web-shooters. But we still get that damn origin story again, and the whole thing feels so uninspired that even a hilarious Stan Lee cameo can't save this film from mediocrity.