The Sad Death of the Hobgoblin

[CBR News]

In their latest look at "bad" comic fights, CSBG revisits the disappointing death of Spidey foe Hobgoblin, which was thankfully later retconned.


Full article here.

[fin5]

So was Spider-man and Wolverine set after Amazing 289

[Mister Mets]

So was Spider-man and Wolverine set after Amazing 289

It was set between ASM 288 and 289, although it was released a few months earlier.

[fin5]

Then I Don't understand sometine if the One-shot was set Before Amazing 289.Ned dies in the One-shot but was Alive and beaten down in 289

[Godzilla2099]

I thought this article was going to cover Macendale's Death when I first read the title. Now that is a death that made zero sense. He was a merc that had Kraven's Strength and cybernetic enhancements. How in the world was Ned able to kill him?

[cyberhubbs]

I'm curious if this can really be considered a retcon.

[Lasse]

I thought this article was going to cover Macendale's Death when I first read the title. Now that is a death that made zero sense. He was a merc that had Kraven's Strength and cybernetic enhancements. How in the world was Ned able to kill him?

Ned didn't kill him. Roderick Kingsley, the original Hobgoblin, did. And how could Roddy kill him? Jason was in a cage, and besides, Kingsley is awesone, while Macendale just isn't.

[Metamorphosis]

I'm curious if this can really be considered a retcon.

Except it WAS a retcon, inasmuch that readers were led to believe that the real Hobgoblin was killed, and it turned out not to be the real deal. That's something Roger Stern had to come back and write.

Ned didn't kill him. Roderick Kingsley, the original Hobgoblin, did. And how could Roddy kill him? Jason was in a cage, and besides, Kingsley is awesone, while Macendale just isn't.

Which is why it was laughable that someone like Phil Urich would be able to kill Kingsley during the "Big Time" run. That was also undone--I don't think we've still ever gotten an explanation why Kingley's brother was in the suit at the time, though.

[Anubhavkumarc]

I think they just wanted to remove Ned from the book.. he was always a liability anyways.

[Lasse]

Except it WAS a retcon, inasmuch that readers were led to believe that the real Hobgoblin was killed, and it turned out not to be the real deal. That's something Roger Stern had to come back and write.



Which is why it was laughable that someone like Phil Urich would be able to kill Kingsley during the "Big Time" run. That was also undone--I don't think we've still ever gotten an explanation why Kingley's brother was in the suit at the time, though.

I don't think that was undone. I think it was Slott's plan all along to fool us into thinking it was Roddy who died.

[Mister Mets]

I think they just wanted to remove Ned from the book.. he was always a liability anyways.

Ned getting killed off wasn't originally tied to the Hobgoblin. Peter David figured that it would be unexpected to reveal that the supervillain's secret identity was that guy who had been killed off.

[BlitheringToot]

Just stopped by to remind y'all how much I hated "Hobgoblin Lives" and the Roderick Kingsley reveal. Thank you for your time––I'll go spread my negativity elsewhere.

[Lasse]

Oh? I liked Hobgoblin Lives, and I Think it was only fair that Roger Stern got to say who he intended Hobgoblin to be.

[BlitheringToot]

Oh? I liked Hobgoblin Lives, and I Think it was only fair that Roger Stern got to say who he intended Hobgoblin to be.

Even if it was Anderson Cooper's somehow LESS intimidating doppelganger?

[Lasse]

I don't know who Anderson Cooper is, but I mean, if Kal-El can play a goofy and meek Clark Kent, why can't Roderick Kingsley hide his ruthless nature?