Comics McFarlane, Larson, Bagley...OH MY!

NinjaCarm

Fantastic
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
3,339
Reaction score
0
Points
31
I started reading comics when McFarlane was drawing The Amazing Spider-Man. I believe this run has to be the second best creative run on Spider-Man to date.

We had McFarlane, then Larson, then Bagely. All top notch. And David Micheline writing who wrote enjoyable stories.

Anyone agree this was probably the best area for The Amazing Spider-Man since, well, the Lee/Ditko/Romita era?:spidey:
 
McFarlane
Spidey1.jpg

Larson
Spidey2.jpg

Bagley
Spidey3-1.jpg


:spidey:
 
I started reading comics when McFarlane was drawing The Amazing Spider-Man. I believe this run has to be the second best creative run on Spider-Man to date.

We had McFarlane, then Larson, then Bagely. All top notch. And David Micheline writing who wrote enjoyable stories.

Anyone agree this was probably the best area for The Amazing Spider-Man since, well, the Lee/Ditko/Romita era?:spidey:

No. I liked the Wein, Wolfman, and Stern eras way better, however, i agree Michelinie and company had some great stuff as well.
 
Originally Posted by CaptainStacy
No. I liked the Wein, Wolfman, and Stern eras way better, however, i agree Michelinie and company had some great stuff as well.
Agreed, They defenitley are great. Don't get me wrong though, Macfarlane, Larsen, and Bagley eras are still one of my ffavorites. The Symbiote storyline will always be fantastic. :up:
 
Agreed, They defenitley are great. Don't get me wrong though, Macfarlane, Larsen, and Bagley eras are still one of my ffavorites. The Symbiote storyline will always be fantastic. :up:

Return OF The Sinister Six was a blast too. :up:
 
I started reading comics when McFarlane was drawing The Amazing Spider-Man. I believe this run has to be the second best creative run on Spider-Man to date.

We had McFarlane, then Larson, then Bagely. All top notch. And David Micheline writing who wrote enjoyable stories.

Anyone agree this was probably the best area for The Amazing Spider-Man since, well, the Lee/Ditko/Romita era?:spidey:

Yeah, that was my fave point too. But that was when I really 1st got into comics, so that must be why:word:
 
Oddly enough, I don't respect your opinion at all.

Hahahahaha, I knew you'd say that. So predictable. Not oddly enough, I don't respect yours, either.

OH MY! :D :D :D
 
I'll say that the Micheline era was probably my second favorite also, mostly because I have so many more of those issues than any other run (except maybe JMS's). I can't say much for the Stern and Wolfman eras, because I've only read 2 or 3 comics from them, although they are exceptional.
 
I'm sorry to say I don't much like Larson's work. It's way too exaggerated for my tastes.
 
Hey Ninjacarm, where's your quote from? It seems really familiar but I can't place it.
 
I absolutely LOVE the 'Micheline era'. It was just so damn vibrant.

As for the artists:

McFarlane gets WAY too much criticizm. In retrospect, the art doesn't hold up as well as the hype once did sure, but for his lack of proper anatomy and limited perspective skills, he brought an awful lot of ideas to the table and had some compositions that just blow your mind.

Larsen is one of my all time fav's. It just looked like he had an insane amount of fun drawing it. Peter looks very much like an aged version of Ditko's Peter, and he eventually refined his Spider-Man to be very different from McFarlane's. How about that chase scene between him and Venom? The thrown steel beam, the crazy contortionist positions, animals escaping the zoo. Good stuff.

Bagley's stuff is kinda stoic compared to the other two when it comes to facial expressions and body types, but he's a superb storyteller and I'm kinda bummed that when he eventually got so damn good it was wasted on Ultimate Spider-Man, which to me is, on the whole, incredibly boring. He perfected Spider-Man's eyes to me. If I think Spider-Man, I think Bagley eyes. Also, noone can draw Carnage NEARLY as well as him.
 
No. I liked the Wein, Wolfman, and Stern eras way better, however, i agree Michelinie and company had some great stuff as well.

I concur....

Wolfman's brief run is considered the second best run an Amazing Spidey writer ever had on that book to Stan Lee's obvious first place... with Roger Stern coming in a close third.

And I'll take a Ross Andru or Keith Pollard Spider-Man ANY day over McFarlane.

:yay:
 
QUOTE=CaptainStacy;13158923]No. I liked the Wein, Wolfman, and Stern eras way better, however, i agree Michelinie and company had some great stuff as well.[/QUOTE]

Aloha,
I'd like to propose a quick Spidey continuity project.Using Silver Age (1956-69), Bronze Age(1970-79) and Modern Age (1980-present), break down Spidey continuity within his various ERAS.
Example-Silver Age-Lee/Ditko era,Lee/Romita era,Continue.
http://www.comicartville.com/newages.htm[
Thanks
Spidey rules
 
QUOTE=CaptainStacy;13158923]No. I liked the Wein, Wolfman, and Stern eras way better, however, i agree Michelinie and company had some great stuff as well.

Aloha,
I'd like to propose a quick Spidey continuity project.Using Silver Age (1956-69), Bronze Age(1970-79) and Modern Age (1980-present), break down Spidey continuity within his various ERAS.
Example-Silver Age-Lee/Ditko era,Lee/Romita era,Continue.
http://www.comicartville.com/newages.htm[
Thanks
Spidey rules[/QUOTE]


How can you break it down once 3 and 4 books start appearing? You can do that system sorta into the mid 70's and even after Spectacular I guess, but once you reach Web and adjectiveless all the creators get jumbled together with some staying long and some leaving after small stints and overlapping and yadda-yadda-yadda.
 
How can you break it down once 3 and 4 books start appearing? You can do that system sorta into the mid 70's and even after Spectacular I guess, but once you reach Web and adjectiveless all the creators get jumbled together with some staying long and some leaving after small stints and overlapping and yadda-yadda-yadda.

I'd Imagine after Micheline it would go

- Clone Saga
- Post Clone (black tarantula, identity crisis and such)
- Byrne/Mackie/Reboot
- JMS
 
Duble ditto. A lot of 90's hot artists = a lot of flash, but no story substance.

A few of em yeah, but overall that's just the myth that this decade's hot shots want you to believe.
 
Honestly, I loved the McFarlane, Larsen, Bagley, Michelinie era as well, probably because that's when I first came on board...although the Stern era rocked harder than anything, IMHO.

Man...the 9o's Spidey comics were SO pretty to look at, though...and we never had to hear "Spidey's life will NEVER be the same".
 
I agree on everything but Todd McFarlane being good...his anatomy is almost as bad as Leifields...
 
I agree on everything but Todd McFarlane being good...his anatomy is almost as bad as Leifields...

McFarlane has NO knowledge of anatomy. I honestly like his artwork...but I can't see why, anymore. I love the amount of detail he puts into his work, but seeing as he doesn't even draw anymore, he's not of much use.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top