Ultimate Spider-Man by Jonathan Hickman and Marco Checchetto

[Prime]

I think it’s because the original Ultimate Universe worked very differently and was a reimagining of different Marvel concepts if they were created in the 2000s.

It still part of the Marvel multiverse. Galactus should be a cosmic being not some machines.

[Garlador]

The more art I get of Ultimate Goblin, the less I'm sold by it .

I get it, though honestly the 616 versions were still flawed even in their own way. Sometimes they were just missing that...panache of their 616 counterparts.

I’m sort of the opposite. Wasn't a fan at first, but it's starting to really grow on me. Has strong shades of the 2099 Exodus Goblin being more tech-built.

[Frontier]

I sort of the opposite. Wasn't a fan at first, but it's starting to really grow on me. Has strong shades of the 2099 Exodus Goblin being more tech-built.

Honestly it reminds me too much of the 2017 Spider-Man cartoon.

[Refrax5]

Yeah there's nothing wrong with depicting heroes as more flawed. It's just all about execution, and sometimes Ultimate didn't execute it well at all.

Ultimate Thor and Tony were really cool versions of those characters, and a part of me is sad we're not gonna see them again. But at the same time the new versions of Thor and Tony are awesome and I'm excited to see more of them so I can't get too sad about it.

I wish they didn't kill Ultimate Cyclops tbh...

Iceman was cool yeah. I also liked Ultimate Kitty (Peter my guy, you fumbled hard ) and Colossus being gay was an interesting change that I liked, and I think Kurt learning to accept his friends sexual orientation is a neat character arc. The X-Men in the Ultimate Universe weren't all that bad in general...though I definitely can't defend some. (Looking at you Logan.)

Also about the FF, considering everything the guy went through in his life I can honestly see how Ultimate Reed ended up the way he did.

I'd rather not remember Ultimate Avengers.

Even Logan was kind of an understandable depiction of how somebody so viciously abused and traumatized might turn out. Like Jean said, he wasn't an evil person, just deeply twisted and damaged from so much abuse and cruelty. He definitely started out as a villain (and even tried to murder Cyclops after he switched sides), but I feel like that's probably what a guy like that would realistically be like. And, to his credit, he grew and changed significantly throughout the series and eventually died stopping Magneto. I think it was just a very blunt, unsanitzed take on the "dark, dangerous antihero" character Logan helped popularize.

[Refrax5]

The more art I get of Ultimate Goblin, the less I'm sold by it .

I get it, though honestly the 616 versions were still flawed even in their own way. Sometimes they were just missing that...panache of their 616 counterparts.

Oh definitely the 616 versions were flawed as well. I just mean that the Ultimate line did the whole "heroes with feet of clay" and "world outside your window" concept that Marvel always had and did it in a modern way. Not all of it worked and some of it has aged very poorly, but I think there's a lot of merit to some of it.

[Huntsman Spider]

I’m sort of the opposite. Wasn't a fan at first, but it's starting to really grow on me. Has strong shades of the 2099 Exodus Goblin being more tech-built.

That the one who gained immortality by siphoning his descendants' blood into himself? Considering at least one billionaire in real life is actually trying something similar . . .

Honestly it reminds me too much of the 2017 Spider-Man cartoon.

Fair enough.

Even Logan was kind of an understandable depiction of how somebody so viciously abused and traumatized might turn out. Like Jean said, he wasn't an evil person, just deeply twisted and damaged from so much abuse and cruelty. He definitely started out as a villain (and even tried to murder Cyclops after he switched sides), but I feel like that's probably what a guy like that would realistically be like. And, to his credit, he grew and changed significantly throughout the series and eventually died stopping Magneto. I think it was just a very blunt, unsanitzed take on the "dark, dangerous antihero" character Logan helped popularize.

Oh definitely the 616 versions were flawed as well. I just mean that the Ultimate line did the whole "heroes with feet of clay" and "world outside your window" concept that Marvel always had and did it in a modern way. Not all of it worked and some of it has aged very poorly, but I think there's a lot of merit to some of it.

Valid enough, I suppose. I think the Ultimate books mainly/originally helmed by Mark Millar did take that a bit too far for some (or a lot of) fans' and readers' comfort, insofar as making some characters presented in a more sympathetic/heroic light within the original 616 continuity terribly pathetic, terrible and pathetic, or just plain terrible with nothing in the way of redeeming qualities. To put it more succinctly, maybe, I'd say the problem was that Ultimate Marvel's general idea of deconstruction a lot of the time simply amounted to, "In real life, these would be deeply s****y people and nothing more," which didn't necessarily sit right with some fans and readers used to their more sympathetic/heroic takes in 616. Still, I can see your point about the value in having a more honest, less sanitized take on how a lot of these heroic and villainous archetypes would work out in a setting closer to reality.

[Webhead]

I liked Gah Lak Tus. Ellis had some cool Ultimate stuff IMO.

[Refrax5]

That the one who gained immortality by siphoning his descendants' blood into himself? Considering at least one billionaire in real life is actually trying something similar . . .



Fair enough.





Valid enough, I suppose. I think the Ultimate books mainly/originally helmed by Mark Millar did take that a bit too far for some (or a lot of) fans' and readers' comfort, insofar as making some characters presented in a more sympathetic/heroic light within the original 616 continuity terribly pathetic, terrible and pathetic, or just plain terrible with nothing in the way of redeeming qualities. To put it more succinctly, maybe, I'd say the problem was that Ultimate Marvel's general idea of deconstruction a lot of the time simply amounted to, "In real life, these would be deeply s****y people and nothing more," which didn't necessarily sit right with some fans and readers used to their more sympathetic/heroic takes in 616. Still, I can see your point about the value in having a more honest, less sanitized take on how a lot of these heroic and villainous archetypes would work out in a setting closer to reality.

And I don't think they were without sympathetic or redeeming qualities, either. Like I said, Jean was able to see into Logan's mind when her powers were spiking and she could see that he wasn't an evil person, just a very damaged one. We see him slowly grow and evolve into somebody similar to the classic Wolverine over time as he strives to be a better man. He's probably one of the more extreme examples, though. Most of the other X-Men weren't drastically different than their 616 counterparts, the FF were all pretty decent people (even Reed for a while) and the Ultimates were kind of a mixed bag. Cap was kind of a jerk, but he wasn't a bad person and he came to question the more problematic aspects of his views over time. Tony was a debaucherous mess, but probably one of the nicest, more compassionate members of the team. Thor was pretty great. And Hawkeye was kind of a psychopath, but he was kind of awesome in spite of it.

Like I said, I agree with you to an extent and there were certainly parts of that universe where they took it way too far and it went from "flawed" to "sociopathic" with certain characters. But I think there was a lot of redeeming qualities to other elements. It is all VERY early 2000s, for better or worse.

Of course, Ultimate Spider-Man was probably the purest, most uncompromised hero there. He was actually a nicer, more selfless person than the 616 version was at that age.

[Huntsman Spider]

And I don't think they were without sympathetic or redeeming qualities, either. Like I said, Jean was able to see into Logan's mind when her powers were spiking and she could see that he wasn't an evil person, just a very damaged one. We see him slowly grow and evolve into somebody similar to the classic Wolverine over time as he strives to be a better man. He's probably one of the more extreme examples, though. Most of the other X-Men weren't drastically different than their 616 counterparts, the FF were all pretty decent people (even Reed for a while) and the Ultimates were kind of a mixed bag. Cap was kind of a jerk, but he wasn't a bad person and he came to question the more problematic aspects of his views over time. Tony was a debaucherous mess, but probably one of the nicest, more compassionate members of the team. Thor was pretty great. And Hawkeye was kind of a psychopath, but he was kind of awesome in spite of it.

Like I said, I agree with you to an extent and there were certainly parts of that universe where they took it way too far and it went from "flawed" to "sociopathic" with certain characters. But I think there was a lot of redeeming qualities to other elements. It is all VERY early 2000s, for better or worse.

Of course, Ultimate Spider-Man was probably the purest, most uncompromised hero there. He was actually a nicer, more selfless person than the 616 version was at that age.

Generally agreed, especially on the last point about the original Ultimate Spider-Man. If there's anything I hope is carried over and forward from that into the new Ultimate Universe, it's Peter Parker's overall characterization as a kind, intelligent, fundamentally noble person, a hero that could bring hope to a world in severe need of it after being under the Maker's thumb for so long.

[Refrax5]

I liked Gah Lak Tus. Ellis had some cool Ultimate stuff IMO.

I did, too. That was a genuinely scary take on the character.

[Ursalink]

I still think Marvel is using this series as smokescreen, a distraction in order to keep masses down, they can say they gave us what we wanted but as the same time not give us what we wanted. Got love the status quo.

1*) The children has to be one boy and one girl to be Ben and May, it is the universe law.

2*) Peter can always grow the beard, when MC2 Peter had facial hair it did threw me off, I always thought MJ would preferred him to be clean shaving, I guess a bread would show a character comics to be older. The Paul thing we just do not have insider knowledge, we can just speculate the design of the character.

Thank you for listed all the, I guess the story checkpoints on how certain character can exist and cannot exist. This can give Hickman a well of stories to tell, especially Gwen and Felicia. I more worry for Gwen because Warren has the cloning thing, I would like to think Felicia would become some kind of vigilante going after people who exploit other people and ruin them financially.

My pleasure.

There's something more I thought about: If the Maker stopped Spider-Man's origin, maybe he stopped the origins of all the "not-related spiders". You know, Jessica Drew, Julia Carpenter... If their "powers" were kept just like Peter's, maybe they could be used on someone else, closer to Peter. How about if Mary Jane, Richard and May get different spider-powers here?

[Refrax5]

My pleasure.

There's something more I thought about: If the Maker stopped Spider-Man's origin, maybe he stopped the origins of all the "not-related spiders". You know, Jessica Drew, Julia Carpenter... If their "powers" were kept just like Peter's, maybe they could be used on someone else, closer to Peter. How about if Mary Jane, Richard and May get different spider-powers here?

He seemed to have stopped all the heroes for the most part. But this universe isn't an exact copy of 616, so who knows if they even exist here.

[CaptainUniverse]

Ultimate Spider-Man #1 variant by Kaare Andrews:

[9AlphaOmega1]

Ultimate Spider-Man #1 variant by Kaare Andrews:

I am glad this is getting promoted.

[Hurricane Billy]

Ultimate Spider-Man #1 variant by Kaare Andrews:

I really dig the 90's comic cover style throwback that Andrews is doing here. Really nice touch!