World Spider-Man: The Animated Series

[jeffjhicks]

I disagree both spectacular spider man and the animated series are great top 2 best animated spider man shows by far but I think animated series was a little bit better because of the art style if not for that I would like them the same. Josh is my favorite spider man voice actor though.

no offense, but that is a terribly shallow reason to like the '94 show over Spectacular. There is nothing (writing wise) that makes '94 better and the animation of Spectacular is so much more fluid and detailed. Yes, I said detailed. Thanks to advances in technology there is more consistency in the city, a wider variety of background motions, none of the slow motion awkwardness that plagues '94 etc.

 

[Leenie]

Season 1 is by far the best season. Good strong episodes, good use of the villains who get to shine in their own episodes solo without being tied to Kingpin (who is also used only when necessary in this season).

Season 2 was good but the decline started here with Kingpin being over used, Morbius appearing more times in this season alone than the likes of Green Goblin and Venom do in the whole series, and them dragging out the Neogenic nightmare saga for a whole season!

I agree entirely. I really enjoy the first season still, and I will always enjoy Christopher Daniel-Barnes as Spidey, but I find that the series past season 1 hasn't aged very well.

It's far from being a bad show or anything, but considering some of the other animated comic book series from the 90's (Batman, Superman, and X-Men), Spider-Man falls a little short. The 90s cartoon's flaws seem even more apparent now after having seen The Spectacular Spider-Man (which lived up to it's "spectacular" name and then some).

Like I said, the 90s Spider-Man isn't a bad show, but it isn't something can really watch anymore past the first season, unlike Batman or X-Men (which I can still watch at any time, really).

 

[zeptron]

no offense, but that is a terribly shallow reason to like the '94 show over Spectacular. There is nothing (writing wise) that makes '94 better and the animation of Spectacular is so much more fluid and detailed. Yes, I said detailed. Thanks to advances in technology there is more consistency in the city, a wider variety of background motions, none of the slow motion awkwardness that plagues '94 etc.

Agree. This is usually the main complaint 90% of the people that dislike Spectacular have. If they actually happen to make a complaint outside it's art style, they complain about "unnecessary changes" when some of those "unnecessary changes" were straight out of comic lore or they can't go without spending a large amount of time talking about TAS and comparing everything instead of just looking at the show as it's own thing.

Hell when it comes to superhero cartoons in general it annoys me when people go "What we had was SO much better, todays stuff sucks!" It's so beyond pretentious. Yeah shows like Batman TAS, X-men TAS, and Justice League/Unlimited were amazing. But there is also more current shows that are just as thought provoking. Earth's Mightiest Heroes, Spectacular Spider-man, Young Justice just to name a few. All of these have rich plots and interesting characters. So no, not everything today is crap.

There's hardcore and militant fans of Spider-man TAS that praise the show to such a level that they automatically look down on any other Spider-man show. It's limiting to put a show up on a pedestal and expect all other shows in the same genre to imitate it rather than do their own thing. It frustrates me so much when some people praise one version to the point of blindly criticizing all the other creative versions (especially when those other works have their own strengths).

 

[Doctor Octopus]

8/10

It loses two points for always recycling footage, and using Kingpin too much at the expense of other villains.

 

[The Caped Knight]

Spider-man TAS 20 years

cast of "SPIDER-MAN:THE ANIMATED SERIES

https://www.facebook.com/makingofsp...2325977960148/329171390608940/?type=1&theater

 

[Sawyer]

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/spider-man-animated-series-cast-745604

 

[The Caped Knight]

The making of Spider-Man: The Animated Series

 

[Venom Spectre]

This is one of my favorite shows despite it's flaws. I really enjoyed the serious depiction of Spidey, unlike what Ultimate does. It also introduced me to more Marvel characters I love to this day such as Blade, Doctor Strange or the Punisher. I'm probably one of the few who enjoyed the Morbius arc.
And a fun story. We don't have comic stores in my country so as a kid I didn't knew many of the Marvel cartoons were in the same universe. Seeing the 90's X-Men show up in Spider-man blew my mind and made me so excited to see these characters interact. Same with Iron Man and the Fantastic Four.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

8/10

This is the second best Spider-Man animated show. Although time has not been kind to the series, it's still worth a revisit every now and again. I just got finished watching the show from start to finish and I have to say the first season was really great and even though there's an obvious decline for the remaining seasons, the show never reached that 'unwatchable' tick mark that some other Spidey show(s) have notched. Lots of nostalgia. Lots of fun. That's what I think of for the 90's show.

 

[Mace Dolex]

9/10

I like this show on the same level as Spider-Man & His Amazing Friends, the stories are still intriguing and very much feel like the 90's, the bad stuff that sticks out are the same shots of mid-nineties bad CGI of the New York skyline.

 

[Lantern Venom]

Not only is this Spider-man's best animated adaptation by far, I rank it only behind Avengers:EMH as the best overall comic book cartoon of all time. Outside of some pacing problems (things got a little too frantic at times) the show was the most respectful handling of Spidey to date and still hasn't been surpassed.

 

[3dman27]

The Show was Still better than the crap we get to watch these days and with all characters and crossovers it was fine treat of Entertainment .

amen to that

 

[The Joker]

Not only is this Spider-man's best animated adaptation by far

Explain how it's a better adaptation of Spider-Man than the Spectacular Spider-Man cartoon.

 

[Venom Spectre]

Explain how it's a better adaptation of Spider-Man than the Spectacular Spider-Man cartoon.

Opinions

 

[The Joker]

Obviously. But everyone has reasons to validate their opinion. I would like to hear his.

 

[3dman27]

What is everyone's favorite single storyline from the show?

Mine is the "Disappearance and Return of Mary Jane Watson" arc that was told in Seasons 3, 4, and 5.

six forgotten heroes

 

[zeptron]

Obviously. But everyone has reasons to validate their opinion. I would like to hear his.

A lot of people tend to use these as their main reasons

1. The art styles between the shows. Yeah TAS had more realistic art that resembled the comics more, but it came out at price. Poor animation, heavy overuse of stock footage, lacking action sequences. Spidey's supposed to be one of the most acrobatic superheroes, but in TAS he moved as fluidly as a 60 year old wrestler. Spectacular's art is to be desired, but it helped provide much more fluid animation and helped provide pretty dynamic action sequences that TAS would have never been able to pull off. Even if it didn't have censorship. I'd say that's a trade-off.

2. Crossovers with other Marvel heroes. Crossovers are cool, but I don't see why they should be a selling point. Nor why the lack of them should be a turnoff. I mean Ultimate Spider-man has crossovers in pretty much ever other episode.

3. Darker and more mature. "Dark" and "mature" doesn't automatically = better. Spider-man TNAS was actually the most mature Spider-man cartoon. So by this logic people use that would make that the best Spider-man cartoon. Hell ironically Spectacular contained themes that TAS would never have allowed. People also label Spectacular with terms like "kiddy" and "childish"(in a negative way). This just makes them sound insecure about their own maturity.

4. TAS being the closest to the comics. I don't know where people are even getting this from. Because I recall plenty of unfaithful moments. If anything Spectacular was the one that paid most tribute to the original comics as each character that appeared that had a name was taken from the comics. Not a single one was made up for the show.

5. The fact that TAS had more episodes. This doesn't mean anything. As plenty of good shows shined briefly while inferior ones tend to drag on. Ultimate Spider-man is already over 70 episodes. Does that make it the best Spider-man show? Absolutely not.



I'm not trying to take sides here or anything as I like both TAS and Spectacular. I think they have different strengths. I just wanted to point these out.

 

[Venom Spectre]

There is no best cartoon as it all boils down to personal preferences. It does get annoying when people say certain shows are better just because. Same with people who claim Spectacular is the holy grail of Spidey cartoons and god forbid you disagree.

 

[Lantern Venom]

Explain how it's a better adaptation of Spider-Man than the Spectacular Spider-Man cartoon.

For starters, the designs of the characters were the most realistic of any Spidey series. SSM's anatomical designs were overly angular and many characters were impossibly thin.

SM:TAS had a very serious tone. When Mary Jane jumped off of a skyscraper to prove to herself that Peter would always be there to save her, that was quite dark by cartoon standards. The show didn't shy away from morally ambiguous characters like Blade, who showed up intent on killing Morbius.

SSM had an enclosed feel and was set in high school. SM:TAS not only had Spidey dealing with adult problems in the real world, it had a Marvel Universe feel to it. Not only did the show delve deeper into the Spider-man roster than other Spidey shows, it showed Peter connected to a vast, inter-dimensional existence. The show executed some really ambitious storylines, and I respected that.

 

[The Joker]

A lot of people tend to use these as their main reasons

1. The art styles between the shows. Yeah TAS had more realistic art that resembled the comics more, but it came out at price. Poor animation, heavy overuse of stock footage, lacking action sequences. Spidey's supposed to be one of the most acrobatic superheroes, but in TAS he moved as fluidly as a 60 year old wrestler. Spectacular's art is to be desired, but it helped provide much more fluid animation and helped provide pretty dynamic action sequences that TAS would have never been able to pull off. Even if it didn't have censorship. I'd say that's a trade-off.

2. Crossovers with other Marvel heroes. Crossovers are cool, but I don't see why they should be a selling point. Nor why the lack of them should be a turnoff. I mean Ultimate Spider-man has crossovers in pretty much ever other episode.

3. Darker and more mature. "Dark" and "mature" doesn't automatically = better. Spider-man TNAS was actually the most mature Spider-man cartoon. So by this logic people use that would make that the best Spider-man cartoon. Hell ironically Spectacular contained themes that TAS would never have allowed. People also label Spectacular with terms like "kiddy" and "childish"(in a negative way). This just makes them sound insecure about their own maturity.

4. TAS being the closest to the comics. I don't know where people are even getting this from. Because I recall plenty of unfaithful moments. If anything Spectacular was the one that paid most tribute to the original comics as each character that appeared that had a name was taken from the comics. Not a single one was made up for the show.

5. The fact that TAS had more episodes. This doesn't mean anything. As plenty of good shines shined briefly while inferior ones tend to drag on. Ultimate Spider-man is already over 70 episodes. Does that make it the best Spider-man show? Absolutely not.

For starters, the designs of the characters were the most realistic of any Spidey series. SSM's anatomical designs were overly angular and many characters were impossibly thin.

SM:TAS had a very serious tone. When Mary Jane jumped off of a skyscraper to prove to herself that Peter would always be there to save her, that was quite dark by cartoon standards. The show didn't shy away from morally ambiguous characters like Blade, who showed up intent on killing Morbius.

Well done, zeptron. They're both nonsense reasons he gave (anatomically correct designs!) but you were totally right.

SSM had an enclosed feel and was set in high school. SM:TAS not only had Spidey dealing with adult problems in the real world, it had a Marvel Universe feel to it. Not only did the show delve deeper into the Spider-man roster than other Spidey shows, it showed Peter connected to a vast, inter-dimensional existence. The show executed some really ambitious storylines, and I respected that.

Horse radish. The show was set in the High School years of Peter's life, as in the early Stan Lee days, which also were heavy on Peter's High School life. So in that regard they were true blue to the comics.

In what way didn't SSM not have Peter dealing with adult problems? He had to deal with money problems, his Aunt being hospitalized, friends he cared about being put in danger etc. Your three reasons don't validate the opinion that it's the most faithful adaption of Spider-Man when it veers off Spider-Man lore in so many ways in other areas. From small details like Spider-Man not even being able to punch someone, to bigger ones like no Gwen Stacy, to over half the show's villains being tied to Kingpin's apron strings, to Electro being some Russian sap general of the Red Skull, to Hobgoblin coming before Green Goblin, to the likes of Morbius being a bigger presence than the likes of Green Goblin, Mysterio, Vulture, and even your precious Venom, and so much more.

SSM's didn't rack up half that many major deviations.

 

[OriginalMiles]

edit: whatever, not worth getting into

 

[Spooderman]

Horse radish. The show was set in the High School years of Peter's life, as in the early Stan Lee days, which also were heavy on Peter's High School life. So in that regard they were true blue to the comics.

Well Peter graduated High School in issue 25, so it's not that important.

Your three reasons don't validate the opinion that it's the most faithful adaption of Spider-Man when it veers off Spider-Man lore in so many ways in other areas. From small details like Spider-Man not even being able to punch someone, to bigger ones like no Gwen Stacy, to over half the show's villains being tied to Kingpin's apron strings, to Electro being some Russian sap general of the Red Skull, to Hobgoblin coming before Green Goblin, to the likes of Morbius being a bigger presence than the likes of Green Goblin, Mysterio, Vulture, and even your precious Venom, and so much more.

I think SSM is the better cartoon, but TAS is much more faithful to the original source material, even adapting several scenes directly from the comics. SSM deviated quite a bit as well, such as having Goblin frame Harry and not have a split personality, having Electro be sympathetic at first, having Tombstone the main crime lord instead of Kingpin, having Eddie be one of Peter's best friends ect, it definitely had that many deviations.

 

[Lantern Venom]

Well done, zeptron. They're both nonsense reasons he gave (anatomically correct designs!) but you were totally right.



Horse radish. The show was set in the High School years of Peter's life, as in the early Stan Lee days, which also were heavy on Peter's High School life. So in that regard they were true blue to the comics.

In what way didn't SSM not have Peter dealing with adult problems? He had to deal with money problems, his Aunt being hospitalized, friends he cared about being put in danger etc. Your three reasons don't validate the opinion that it's the most faithful adaption of Spider-Man when it veers off Spider-Man lore in so many ways in other areas. From small details like Spider-Man not even being able to punch someone, to bigger ones like no Gwen Stacy, to over half the show's villains being tied to Kingpin's apron strings, to Electro being some Russian sap general of the Red Skull, to Hobgoblin coming before Green Goblin, to the likes of Morbius being a bigger presence than the likes of Green Goblin, Mysterio, Vulture, and even your precious Venom, and so much more.

SSM's didn't rack up half that many major deviations.

Given that comic books and their subsequent adaptations have an essential visual element, it shouldn't surprise you that fans have strong inclinations towards certain styles.

As for your assertion that TAS "veered off" of the Spidey mythos, I'd term it as expanding the world around him. Including storylines with characters like the Beyonder, Dormammu, and Madame Webb ( I really liked the creepy factor she brought) were part of the ambitious storylines I mentioned.

While I'm aware that Peter's initial comic run began with high school as a backdrop, I had already grown bored with the high school structure (not just Spidey, in all stories ) by the '80s. I really dug an adult Spidey with more mature problems.

 

[OriginalMiles]

I like them both equally.

Maybe SSM a little bit more, because it had better writing... but TAS was awesome. I love its version of the symbiote story, and the whole Make a Wish two parter is great.

Also, SECRET WARS!!!!

 

[zeptron]

Well Peter graduated High School in issue 25, so it's not that important.



I think SSM is the better cartoon, but TAS is much more faithful to the original source material, even adapting several scenes directly from the comics. SSM deviated quite a bit as well, such as having Goblin frame Harry and not have a split personality, having Electro be sympathetic at first, having Tombstone the main crime lord instead of Kingpin, having Eddie be one of Peter's best friends ect, it definitely had that many deviations.

- Stan Lee originally made so that Norman was actually aware of his actions as the Green Goblin. The whole split personality stuff didn't come until after he was unmasked for the first time.

- Spectacular used elements from mainly the original comics and a few elements from the Ultimate Spider-man comics. Things like Peter and Eddie being friends were all taken from the latter. I mean in the original comics, they weren't rivals at the Bugle either. They never even met until after Eddie became Venom.

- The reason they had Tombstone as the main crime lord was because legal issues prevented the creators from using Kingpin.

- While it's true that Electro was never sympathetic in the comics, the way Spectacular handled him was actually an improvement. That was better than having be a one dimensional villain.