Stay warm out there!
Amazing Spider-Man (Vol. 1) #48
Published: c. March, 1967?
Cover Date: May, 1967
“The Wings of the Vulture!”
Writer: Stan Lee
Artist: John Romita
Inker: John Romita
Letterer: Sam Rosen
You might be interested in …
Panel(s) of the Day #1146
Can he do it?! (Answer: No.) Amazing Spider-Man (Vol. 1) #79 Published: c. October, 1969? Cover Date: December, 1969 “To Prowl No More!” Writer: Stan Lee Artist: John Buscema Inker: Jim Mooney Letterer: Sam Rosen
Panel of the Day #1600! (Splash Page Sunday!)
A shot straight out of a horror movie. Amazing Spider-Man (Vol. 1) #300 Published: c. February, 1988? Cover Date: May, 1988 “Venom” Writer: David Michelinie Artist: Todd McFarlane Inker: Todd McFarlane Letterer: Rick Parker Colorist: […]
Panel of the Day #415 (Splash Page Sunday!)
Can you believe Batman’s been around for 80 years? Pretty soon we’ll have 60 years of Spider-Man! Spider-Man and Batman Published: c. July, 1995? Cover Date: September, 1995 “Disordered Minds” Writer: J.M. DeMatteis Artist: Mark […]
1 Comment
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”: “@Paul Penna: I wouldn’t say I was liking Cormac before the Ravage reveal but his character was … “ok”. I…” Oct 4, 08:59- 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
It’s funny that even after 48 issues, Stan still doesn’t know exactly how the spider-sense works. It keeps changing every issue for whatever the plot demands.
How exactly does the fact that it’s snowing “muffle” it? And it doesn’t “latch onto” a threat *somewhere* in the city – it only goes off if there’s an immediate threat to Spidey. If Kraven is 20 blocks away the spider-sense will not go off to lead Spidey to an area where there is a threat. In this scenario Spidey is currently 100% safe and the spider-sense would be leading him to an area where he will be in danger – in effect the spider-sense is putting him into a dangerous situation instead of warning him of danger.