Sometimes it’s hard to be a super hero!
Amazing Spider-Man (Vol. 1) #15
Published: c. June, 1964?
Cover Date: August, 1964
“Kraven the Hunter!”
Writer: Stan Lee
Artist: Steve Ditko
Inker: Steve Ditko
Letterer: Artie Simek
You might be interested in …
Panel of the Day #291
Well, these guys are useless. Looks like it’s up to Spidey now! Amazing Spider-Man (Vol. 1) #43 Published: c. October, 1966? Cover Date: December, 1966 “Rhino on the Rampage!” Writer: Stan Lee Artist: John Romita […]
Panel(s) of the Day #1631 (Mary Jane Monday!)
Happy New Year! Stay safe out there. Amazing Spider-Man (Vol. 1) #143 Published: c. January, 1975? Cover Date: April, 1975 “…And the Wind Cries: Cyclone!” Writer: Gerry Conway Artist: Ross Andru Inker: Frank Giacoia and […]
Panel(s) of the Day #1278 (Ditko!)
Who else would Spidey bring along with him? Maybe the police, I guess. Amazing Spider-Man (Vol. 1) #12 Published: c. March, 1964? Cover Date: May, 1964 “Unmasked by Dr. Octopus!” Writer: Stan Lee Artist: Steve […]
6 Comments
Leave a Reply
Support the Crawlspace on Patreon
Crawlspace Discord
Recent Comments
on Craig’s Critique: Amazing Spider-Man #1000 (Non-Legacy #36): “Ravaged” or “Well, At Least We Have These Backups”: “I’m surprised by how much I enjoyed Cormac Crane/Ravage. The story is well written, his powers are interesting and he…” Oct 3, 16:27- on Craig’s Critique: Amazing Spider-Man #1000 (Non-Legacy #36): “Ravaged” or “Well, At Least We Have These Backups”: “@Big John: Yeah, an annual is a good comparison. Annuals used to have one big story and 1-2 backups, and…” Oct 2, 22:20
- on Craig’s Critique: Amazing Spider-Man #1000 (Non-Legacy #36): “Ravaged” or “Well, At Least We Have These Backups”: “This was a glorified Annual with A-List talent on the back-ups. And you know, if it was “only” an Annual,…” Oct 2, 18:09
- on Marco Speaks Spidey: Amazing Spider-Man #1000 – “Ravaged” Review: “When a creative team runs out of meaningful stories to tell about a character’s future, they inevitably start digging up…” Sep 30, 16:11
- on Spider-Variants of the Week 9/30/26: “Who’s getting all the ASM covers? You’d need to take out a loan. Thanks Mohammed for the work you do…” Sep 28, 23:55
- on Marco Speaks Spidey- Challenges of Doom: Spider-Man #1 Review: ““takes us back years for the previously untold first encounter between Peter Parker and Victor von Doom.” Wait, I thought…” Sep 10, 09:24
- on The Top Ten Most Wanted Spider-Man 1967 Figures: “I hope we get more toys from that cartoon.” Sep 8, 19:52
- on Marco Speaks Spidey: What If…? Jessica Jones #1 Review: ““Instead, Jessica’s Spider-Girl career helped make Peter’s career as a reporter.” This is a problem I have with a lot…” Sep 4, 06:03
- on Craig’s Critique: Amazing Spider-Man #35 (Legacy #999): “Gwen Gone Wild” or “Stroke of Bad Luck”: “@Evan Berry: I am on record as enjoying the Spider-Norman issues much more than the Peter-in-space issues. There was much…” Aug 30, 09:30
- on Craig’s Critique: Amazing Spider-Man #35 (Legacy #999): “Gwen Gone Wild” or “Stroke of Bad Luck”: “@Hornacek – I sort of zoned out of the space issues of this run and preferred the Spider-Norman issues (which…” Aug 29, 15:57
@hornacek — Well, it would have (a) if there were no typos, and (b) if I could do simple arithmetic today.
@hornacek — That makes sense. I see there’s a three-hour difference between your post and the time displayed, as well. Right now it’s 11:2r AM by my watch. I suppose this will display as 2:2r PM.
@Evan – Maybe it uses the timzeone where the site’s server is stored? I’m posting this comment at 7:06pm local time.
Also, I’ve always wondered why the time stamp on my comments — from my perspective, at least — is always four hours in the future.
I would think the hunt would be that much more interesting if Kraven knew nothing about his quarry.
I love the “Move it, bub! You’re blockin’ progress!” line. This guy doesn’t give an F about anything.