Has Spider-Man become Marvel's poor man version of Batman?

[Kaitou D. Kid]

Missed this addition but gotta say, you are totally right about this. I re-read JMS' run in full last year and what struck me on re-reading it is that it was much funnier than I remember it being. There are all these amazing one-panel gags or cameos with background characters that are hilarious and add so much. And Peter absolutely comes across as the way you describe him there.

I think the seriousness of JMS sticks out because it's jarring compared to how he's been written since so that tends to stick out among other stuff. But yeah it's definitely underrated for its humor.

Yep, JMS Spider-Man does a lot of weird funny s*** if we think about it:

• Goes around calling random strangers "beautiful" after surviving Morlun
• Gets in arguments with spiders in his apartment
• Prefers to make jabs at New Jersey while Ezekiel is giving a speech in the middle of Africa
• Yells "I'm the luckiest man alive!" off rooftops
• Yells the same thing with a hot dog in his mouth to some guy's face
• Quotes Dr. Evil at 3AM
• Gets in random banter with waiters

[Uncanny Mutie]

The popularity and success of Spider-Man is tied to his powers, his abilities and his rogues gallery, the art and humor while the age was incidental.

It's a fact that the sales of Spider-Man increased considerably after he graduated high school and went to college. The vast majority of his adventures in comics don't feature him as a student at all. I mean the title is Spider-Man and not Spider-Boy or Spider-Teen. Stan Lee after he finished his run on Spider-Man had many chances to write Spider-Man in the newspaper strip and special one-off short strips here and there, not once did he ever write a young version of Spider-Man.

The newspaper strip which for the longest time had a bigger active readership than the monthly ongoing and which actually served as the first introduction to Spider-Man until the Raimi film had him as a married man as well.

All told, the concept of Spider-Man as a teenager is a pretty recent trend (2000s) and wasn't an inherent part of the franchise in the classical original period.

I said his INITIAL popularity and success was in large part due to his youthfulness. Most teenagers were sidekicks until Spider-Man came along, so having a major, solo, flagship superhero be a teenage high schooler was a BIG DEAL and definitely helped him become successful, popular, and a standout among all the other superheroes on the market. That's something that should be seriously considered and mentioned when discussing Spider-Man's age and what it should be, and is also why even if you want to talk about how long he was depicted as a college student or in his early 20s---which is STILL young and not far from a teenager---I think most people would generally agree that they don't want Spider-Man to be or feel TOO old, because it takes him too far away from his roots as a character. I think most fans would agree that they don't want to see Spider-Man stuck as a 15 year old high school kid forever, but when you make him feel or be one to 40+, then you're kind of straying away from who is as a character. Heck, DC won't even let Batman and Superman feel or be written older than early to mid 30s in mainstream continuity, so Spider-Man definitely shouldn't skew that old, even if he is written as grown.

[Uncanny Mutie]

To me JMS and Stern are the best SM writers of all time and if you take a look and Stern´s Peter, he acts, thinks and speaks like someone way older than a guy his yearly 20s, he´s experienced, assertive, hot-headed and (this is a strong point that Stern really wanted to drive home) powerful.

Despite being single, there´re a lot of similarities in the way he was portrayed by both writers and imo it´s the blueprint of the perfect PP/SM

Stern's Peter/Spider-Man did not feel OLD or necessarily beyond his 20s to me. He just felt mature as far as being powerful, confident, experienced, etc goes, which he should have after a good 10 years or so of superheroing (considering he became Spider-Man when he was 15). Being experienced and confident in the job you do does not equate to old, especially when you start at an age so young that you can still be in your mid 20s 10 years into doing said job.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

Technically, Quesada isn't wrong that part of Spider-Man's initial appeal was that he was an empowerment metaphor for teens. I mean, that fact is more-or-less ingrained in history.

It's just that that premise doesn't support Quesada's conclusion the way he thinks it does. If we had to break down Quesada's thought process in a logic course, it would go something like this:

Premise 1: Part of Spider-Man's initial appeal was that he was an empowerment metaphor for teens.
Conclusion: Spider-Man's entire appeal is that he is an empowerment metaphor for teens.

This makes no sense. There has to be a second premise to connect the two, but Quesada has never provided it. However, it's easy to figure out what it is...

Premise 1: Part of Spider-Man's initial appeal was that he was an empowerment metaphor for teens.
Missing Premise 2: Spider-Man's sole appeal is that he was an empowerment metaphor for teens, and that is still his main and only appeal right now to any new 616 readers.
Conclusion: Spider-Man's entire appeal is that he is an empowerment metaphor for teens.


In order for OMD to be justified, both premises have to be true. There is evidence for the first premise being true, but zero for the second. The second is mainly based on false assumptions and bad reasoning (and also mountains of nostalgia) on Quesada's part.

Quesada's conclusion can therefore also be considered an example of using a half-truth to promote a lie.

[Noronha]

Not really. Oftentimes, the writers' ability is overstated. Stern's writing doesn't feel so essential to making it work.

It's subjective but here we´re going to disagree
Stern´s writing, plots and understanding of the characters is way above I´d say 90% of all SM writers.
Why do people rate him as highly as they do all theses years later, why do people still remember The Kid, Juggernaut, Hobgoblin all these years later?

I'd say his ability is what set him apart and what made a story like the Kid work the way it did.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

I said his INITIAL popularity and success was in large part due to his youthfulness.

"initial popularity" is an incidental and irrelevant thing when it comes to Spider-Man. The thing about Spider-Man is that he's always been popular and at the very top (not always #1 but always in the very top 3-4) and in merchandise he's above Superman and Batman and the other peasants.That's very rare.

Every other major superhero title has had periods of boom and bust. The Fantastic Four have never recovered the heights of the '60s when they were the top comics. In the case of Superman he was very big when he made his debut in the late '30s but for the whole of the 1940s, Fawcett Comics' Captain Marvel (aka Shazam) outsold him. In the 1950s and 1960s to '70s, Supes was back on top but then Spider-Man outsold him (that was in part the reason why the famous crossover Superman v. The Amazing Spider-Man happeend) and then in DC titles, Batman and Teen Titans became the top titles for DC. In the case of other Marvel stalwarts, the X-Men were nobodies until the mid-70s and then for some 25 years they dominated superhero comics, until Marvel kneecapped them in favor of the Avengers during the Quesada years.

The fact that Spider-Man as a character has changed so much and still maintained his popularity and in fact increased his popularity means that "initial popularity and success" probably doesn't have a great deal to do with why he's been such a success. Spider-Man didn't become top of the heap out of the gates. He relied and depended on word-of-mouth and it's because the title grew and changed that's why people embraced him. And if the character has maintained his popularity against all those changes and increased because of that then that means that Spider-Man growing up was the real reason for his popularity.

I think most fans would agree that they don't want to see Spider-Man stuck as a 15 year old high school kid forever,

Glad we have consensus on this. I will say that it's impossible to have a discussion on how old Spider-Man should be when the operating reality is to make Spider-Man as young and as stupid as possible across adaptations, especially the moronic version in the MCU.

... but when you make him feel or be one to 40+, then you're kind of straying away from who is as a character.

Here's the thing, "feelings" are subjective. In your words, you feel Spider-Man in the JMS era felt he was in his '40s. But that's not necessarily the way all readers feel. Me and another poster pointed out that the seriousness sticks out in JMS because of how far the run after him went, but his Spider-Man was still humorous and balanced and not all that old either. Maybe if you read the comics again, you'll feel differently, if not well remember not everyone feels that way.

eck, DC won't even let Batman and Superman feel or be written older than early to mid 30s in mainstream continuity...

Batman and Superman definitely feel like they're in their '40s in their comics incarnations. Both of them are fathers of kids who are approaching their teenage years. Grant Morrison's Batman definitely felt like he was early '40s. The Batman Arkham games which basically show the final three years of his superhero career also feature him looking like he hit 40. Superman in Dan Jurgens/Tomasi's run, aka Post-Crisis Superman (i.e. the John Byrne Superman who fought and died fighting Doomsday) aged real-time and came back to continuity with a young child in his tow alongside a beard. Meaning he didn't come back as a Dad, he came back having been a dad and raised a kid (and there's nothing that ages you more than actually raising a child).

And besides, the most recent Batman on-screen, Ben Affleck, currently back in circulation via the "Snyder Cut" is an old guy pushing 50.

Stern's Peter/Spider-Man did not feel OLD or necessarily beyond his 20s to me. He just felt mature as far as being powerful, confident, experienced, etc goes, which he should have after a good 10 years or so of superheroing (considering he became Spider-Man when he was 15). Being experienced and confident in the job you do does not equate to old, especially when you start at an age so young that you can still be in your mid 20s 10 years into doing said job.

Again feelings are subjective, you need to move past that if we want to have a discussion about aging. Because again not everyone here feels the way you do.

[Uncanny Mutie]

Batman and Superman definitely feel like they're in their '40s in their comics incarnations. Both of them are fathers of kids who are approaching their teenage years. Grant Morrison's Batman definitely felt like he was early '40s. The Batman Arkham games which basically show the final three years of his superhero career also feature him looking like he hit 40. Superman in Dan Jurgens/Tomasi's run, aka Post-Crisis Superman (i.e. the John Byrne Superman who fought and died fighting Doomsday) aged real-time and came back to continuity with a young child in his tow alongside a beard. Meaning he didn't come back as a Dad, he came back having been a dad and raised a kid (and there's nothing that ages you more than actually raising a child).

And besides, the most recent Batman on-screen, Ben Affleck, currently back in circulation via the "Snyder Cut" is an old guy pushing 50.

Keep in mind, I said modern/current age MAINSTREAM continuity (comics). So I'm not going to trail off into a debate about Zack Snyder's weird and polarizing vision for Batman and Superman in his movies. But getting back to present day mainstream COMIC continuity, Jon and Damian are like 10 and 12...you think you have to be in your 40s to have a 10 to 12 year old?!? Yes, Batman and Superman are currently being written as parents, but they still manage to not feel old JUST BECAUSE they are parents, which I think DC was deliberate about and that writers have actually done a good job with. If anything, current day DC writers seem to make and want to keep Batman and Superman mid 30s MAX. JMS as a writer just managed to make Spider-Man feel way older anyway, which is why I said the marriage never really made him feel older UNTIL JMS wrote Peter/Spider-Man. I guess that was just due to JMS' writing style, but it is what it is.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Keep in mind, I said modern/current age MAINSTREAM continuity. So I'm not going to trail off into a debate about Zack Snyder weird vision for Batman and Superman in his movies.

The fact is that the comics have featured Superman and Batman as fathers and parents for some 20 years now. And regardless of how you feel about Snyder, the fact is the most recent on-screen versions of Batman have been as a guy pushing 50. Before that, you go to Christian Bale, the last Batman film, The Dark Knight Rises (2012), had him retired for some 8 years and the version we see in that film is probably early 30s but he also starts the movie walking around with a cane and so on. So for the last decade we have had an aging Batman across all films.

But getting back to present day mainstream COMIC continuity, Damian and Jon are like 12...you think you have to be in your 40s to have a 12 year old?!?

If you get married in your late 20s or early 30s then yeah. Simple maths. If you get married and have a kid when you are 28 or 29, when that kid hits 12, you're gonna be in your '40s. Unless we are talking about very young parents, or having a kid when you are about 20 or 21, which was never a possibility for either Batman or Superman. Peter and MJ come close, when they got married they were both in their early 20s, and were written as a very young married couple.

Post-Crisis Superman and Lois, i.e. the one from "Death of Superman" became Superman in his 30s (i.e. a publicly known figure as Superman) and came across as early-mid 30s for most of his run. Then Flashpoint happened and he and Lois went away somewhere and came back with kid. So the implication is that the Superman who came back in continuity would have to be pushing 40.

Yes, Batman and Superman are currently being written as parents, but they still manage to not feel old JUST because they are parents,

To you perhaps they don't feel old, but to others they do. I've come across complaints by many who felt that Batman in comics tends to be too old and too handicapped managing his Batfamily and he's always written as the comics' version of some Patriarch of a large family. A superhero Scrooge McDuck.

Like one of the issues of the Tom King Batman/Catwoman romance is that while (early on at least) it felt good and a breath of fresh air, it had a mix of tones. On one hand King seemed to write a youngish version of them as a couple but on the other hand, Catwoman is also introduced as the Dad's new girlfriend to his kids and so on. It felt different and inferior from BATMAN HUSH where you had Batman and Catwoman written as people in their '30s having had many bad relationships finally taking a shot at love and that felt more appropriate.

...which I think DC was deliberate about and writers have actually done a good job about.

Not sure about good job. Batman's sales tanked badly during the latter part of King's run and it hasn't fully recovered yet.

[Uncanny Mutie]

The fact is that the comics have featured Superman and Batman as fathers and parents for some 20 years now. And regardless of how you feel about Snyder, the fact is the most recent on-screen versions of Batman have been as a guy pushing 50. Before that, you go to Christian Bale, the last Batman film, The Dark Knight Rises (2012), had him retired for some 8 years and the version we see in that film is probably early 30s but he also starts the movie walking around with a cane and so on. So for the last decade we have had an aging Batman across all films.



If you get married in your late 20s or early 30s then yeah. Simple maths. If you get married and have a kid when you are 28 or 29, when that kid hits 12, you're gonna be in your '40s. Unless we are talking about very young parents, or having a kid when you are about 20 or 21, which was never a possibility for either Batman or Superman. Peter and MJ come close, when they got married they were both in their early 20s, and were written as a very young married couple.

Post-Crisis Superman and Lois, i.e. the one from "Death of Superman" became Superman in his 30s (i.e. a publicly known figure as Superman) and came across as early-mid 30s for most of his run. Then Flashpoint happened and he and Lois went away somewhere and came back with kid. So the implication is that the Superman who came back in continuity would have to be pushing 40.



To you perhaps they don't feel old, but to others they do. I've come across complaints by many who felt that Batman in comics tends to be too old and too handicapped managing his Batfamily and he's always written as the comics' version of some Patriarch of a large family. A superhero Scrooge McDuck.

Like one of the issues of the Tom King Batman/Catwoman romance is that while (early on at least) it felt good and a breath of fresh air, it had a mix of tones. On one hand King seemed to write a youngish version of them as a couple but on the other hand, Catwoman is also introduced as the Dad's new girlfriend to his kids and so on. It felt different and inferior from BATMAN HUSH where you had Batman and Catwoman written as people in their '30s having had many bad relationships finally taking a shot at love and that felt more appropriate.



Not sure about good job. Batman's sales tanked badly during the latter part of King's run and it hasn't fully recovered yet.

LOL, prehaps you need to check your "maths" and they're not as "simple" as you think they are, if you think that having a kid that hasn't even hit puberty yet means you HAVE to be 40 something (I love how you intentionally left out the entire mid 20s range for getting married and starting a family, just for the sake of trying to make your argument look irrefutable).

Aside from that, you are doing A LOT of needless nitpicking, goal post moving, and talking in circles (and you're STILL bringing up movies and non-continuity stories/outside media), so I'm just going to leave it right here and say "agree to disagree." Have a good one, and keep on enjoying your Spidey reading...

[Revolutionary_Jack]

LOL, prehaps you need to check your "maths" and they're not as "simple" as you think they are, if you think that having a kid that hasn't even hit puberty yet means you HAVE to be 40 something

Are you seriously going to argue that Superman was written as mid-20s or early 20s from John Byrne's THE MAN OF STEEL to THE DEATH OF SUPERMAN to FLASHPOINT? Are you going to argue that the version of Post-Crisis Superman and Batman were written as early-to-mid 20s during that entire run?

Because if you are I am gonna have to ask what evidence you have in support.

If Superman and Batman are early-to-mid 20s then that would mean they are the same age bracket as Spider-Man. And one thing I do agree about superhero aging is that Spider-Man should always be, and always feel, younger than Superman and Batman, about the same age as Nightwing or Supergirl. And as someone reading all three titles at the time, JMS Spider-Man still felt younger than the Batman of DC comics at the time, and the Superman of that period (think BATMAN HUSH).

If Superman was late 20s, i.e. around 28 or 29, and if he has a kid who yourself said came across as being 12 years old, then that means he'd be 40 or pushing 40. I am sorry but it's completely plausible and in fact likely that the Superman in DC's current continuity is in his 40s, and Batman as well.

To add further to this...thanks to changes in lifestyle and modern medicine, it's likely that 40 won't feel as old a number as it did feel once. I mean Tom Brady is 42 years old and dude looks a decade or so younger.

For you 40 feels like a dreadful number but it's not the case that's true for everyone or will always be the case forever. Age is a social construct like everything else. The word teenager itself was invented around the mid-40s in a Life magazine profile, and the concept of adolescence is a fairly recent construction.

[Spiderfan001]

A diverse selection of Spider books + bad Venom comics is better than 5 Peter books + bad Venom comics

I think a middle ground is the best thing.We can have a ASM ongoing with serious stuff (with someone like Zdarsky) and then a friendly neighbourhood/spectacular for light hearted fun stuff(Tom Taylor).We can alternate between 2099 and miles with their ongoings(A miles one for 3 years and then 2099 for 2).A decent venom/symbiote comic and a mini for the others(Ben ,Silk,Notgwen,kaine,Webb,Arana,etc).

[Spiderfan001]

It's a fact that a person who goes through as many experiences as Peter from the age of 15 to his mid-20s would come off as being far older than others in his age. It's not too different from people who had to "grow up fast" and become independent and a breadwinner early in their lives. If you allegorize Spider-Man you can say that his experience is similar to traumatized victims of attacks or bereavement (he lost his uncle to gun violence, his first girlfriend was murdered by a terrorist), he's had several jobs. As an allegory, Spider-Man is somewhat of a first responder, he's the one who intervenes and is there on the scene first. Many of the frontline first responders during the COVID-19 crisis are mid-20s people you know. And over the last year they've been through stuff more than many people will go through during their full lifetimes. So if you were to meet them, they would come across as a little older than their years.

That's also true when you look at the original Lee-Ditko run you will find that Peter's on the whole clearly more mature than many people in his high school. Not completely mature since Lee-Ditko Peter does act impulsively in other moments but he's clearly dealing with stuff that makes him hard to relate to people of his own age.

Remember also that the majority of the Lee-Ditko era has Peter not in high school but as an employee at the Daily Bugle, he was dating the office secretary (Betty Brant who had to work early and skip school). From his inception, Spider-Man was always written in stories and situations far older than his stated age range. When Spider-Man was a teenager he wasn't written as a teenager. The kind of forced immaturity that you see in Bendis' USM and, irredemably so, in MCU Spider-Man, is worlds away from how Lee and Ditko saw the character.

This.Peter is way more mature than a person his age.his entire thing is responsibilty.People like Slott and quesada don't realize that characters can be more complex than 2 layers.JMS peter was amazing since he had the humour of a 20's guy and lots of it but had the maturity of veteran hero.

[Speed Force League Unlimited]

I made a joke reply two months ago and some here took it a little too seriously. But I'll answer the thread seriously now.

When it comes to family a number of characters have those; Superman, Green Lantern, Green Arrow, the Flash... even Wolverine has that. Only one of these characters started as a Batman copycat, but long since moved away from that.
Spider-Man's family are mostly other dimension friends that are not very related to him save for Spidery powers, and Miles started in Ultimate comics but transferred to 616 due to rising popularity. Dan Slott did not start this trend for Spider-Man.

Going back to Green Arrow's example; Peter feels closer to Oliver now as the rich guy who lost his company, but Ollie had to sell his while Pete felt the need to destroy his, so there is no poor man replica of the other character in this situation.

[Huntsman Spider]

I made a joke reply two months ago and some her took it a little too seriously. But I'll answer the thread seriously now.

When it comes to family a number of characters have those; Superman, Green Lantern, Green Arrow, the Flash... even Wolverine has that. Only one of these characters started as a Batman copycat, but long since moved away from that.
Spider-Man's family are mostly other dimension friends that are not very related to him save for Spidery powers, and Miles started in Ultimate comics but transferred to 616 due to rising popularity. Dan Slott did not start this trend for Spider-Man.

Going back to Green Arrow's example; Peter feels closer to Oliver now as the rich guy who lost his company, but Ollie had to sell his while Pete felt the need to destroy his, so there is no poor man replica of the other character in this situation.

To be somewhat fair to him, he felt the need to destroy Parker Industries because Otto Octavius was gonna take it back (as it was really his creation) and then give it to HYDRA, whom Otto was allied or aligned with during Secret Empire, even joining the HYDRAvengers that were active as the "legitimate" Avengers in HYDRA's reign over the United States. Given that Parker Industries' New York base was the Baxter Building, with its own functional time machine . . . would anyone want HYDRA getting their hands on that and using it to rewrite history in their own image, as nearly happened when HYDRA-Cap was able to finally secure the complete Cosmic Cube before the real Steve Rogers came back and took him down?