MTV Spider-Man: Where Did It Go Wrong?

[Mister Intensity]

Maybe if the villains created for the show were better then people wouldn't be complaining about the lack of the popular Spider-Man villains.

Mister Intensity

 

[Ssrn53]

Maybe if the villains created for the show were better then people wouldn't be complaining about the lack of the popular Spider-Man villains.

Mister Intensity

Well maybe this show wasn't made to appeal to those fans.

 

[Mister Intensity]

Well maybe this show wasn't made to appeal to those fans.

Although I do see what you are saying because some fans dismiss a show based on a superhero if it doesn't follow anything from previous adaptations but I felt that the scripts were lackluster and the villains were uninteresting. I could care less if any of Spider-Man's established villains showed up if I find the episodes entertaining. With three or four exceptions I didn't enjoy the show. Interestingly my favorite villains from the show were the twins from Mind Games and they had nothing to do with any previous Spider Man adaptations. Also the only supporting cast member remotely interesting was Indy and she never appeared anywhere before. I rather judge a show on its own merits rather than against anything that has come before and many aspects Spider-Man on MTV was lacking.

Mister Intensity

 

[Spider-Friends]

With three or four exceptions I didn't enjoy the show. Interestingly my favorite villains from the show were the twins from Mind Games and they had nothing to do with any previous Spider Man adaptations. Also the only supporting cast member remotely interesting was Indy and she never appeared anywhere before.

I think how much people liked it had to do with their expectations. I knew before watching this show that the creators would not be able to do much with Peter, MJ, Harry or any major villains because this show had to fit between two movies. Not only that but they wanted to appeal to a mass audience like the movie did. Therefore it had to be more "down to earth" than comic book audiences would like.

If you didn't like it, fine...everyone is intitled to their own opinion. But there is no doubt that the MTV cartoon would appeal to a mass audience more so than the 90s cartoon ever could have.

 

[Mister Intensity]

No doubt, besides the 90's series have not aged well. Watching the reruns on ABC Family is painful, which is funny because Amazing Friends is still watchable after over twenty years.

Mister Intensity

 

[Spider-Friends]

No doubt, besides the 90's series have not aged well. Watching the reruns on ABC Family is painful, which is funny because Amazing Friends is still watchable after over twenty years.

Mister Intensity

Hello, my new best friend!

 

[Hypestyle]

I think it was a great experiment.. the cable forum allowed for more casually 'adult' dialogue (mild swearing, "you pissed me off, etc.") and character interaction.. the best i've seen yet..

true indeed, there was a preponderance of original villains-- but-- they seemed to make them work realistically...

one thing I didn't like was Kingpin's portrayal-- though, you could look at it one of two ways.. one, in his original 60's comics portrayal, he wasn't an untouchable schemer who didn't get his hands dirty.. he actually participated in some of the heists he planned.. so maybe it fit in a retro way.. but if you notice, he threatens a flunky if he got his burger order wrong (!), and is later seen heaping a bunch of cool-whip into his coffee... sigh... portraying him as a glutton was kind of cheap..

Indy was interesting... what was her ethnicity anyway?

Harry going blonde was a curveball.. but I dunno, maybe they felt they wanted to differentiate it from Peter.. (Remember the blonde Iceman in the 80's toons?)

the lack of "classic" foes may have had something to do with not interfering with movie plans for some of them (Ock)... that said, there were still some that may have been good ideas.. mysterio.. rhino.. shocker.. etc..

the bad thing is, if a new series is revived, and it's given the KIDS WB treatment, will folks accept that, with all the censorship that's bound to take place?

sigh... sometimes i think some fans don't know what they want...

 

[Tash]

I really hope that this series flopping doesn't destroy any hope for another series after the last movie comes out (2007, right?). That would be the time to start a series. Especially if they want it to be a movie tie-in series.

 

[Spider-Man]

the lack of "classic" foes may have had something to do with not interfering with movie plans for some of them (Ock)... that said, there were still some that may have been good ideas.. mysterio.. rhino.. shocker.. etc..

That's what I think. Alot of thebigger villians couldn't be touched in this series. They'd feel out of place for one thing and they probably wouldn't mesh right with the style of the series. I think that's why I think the majority of the villians were "hip" versions.

the bad thing is, if a new series is revived, and it's given the KIDS WB treatment, will folks accept that, with all the censorship that's bound to take place? sigh... sometimes i think some fans don't know what they want...

I think it's almost gauranteed the next version will get the "KidsWB" treatment. That's not damning, thought. Spider-Man could definitely work in that formula just fine.

 

[Xtreme]

I liked it alot, I was shocked when I found out that there wasn't going to be a second season.

 

[Icer]

Movie continuity
Lame villains
The fact it aired on MTV
Celeb Voices

Handcuffing the fact that there could be no Green Goblin, Octopus, Venom, etc. The lack of Aunt May and Bugle.

It could have been great, it was just average. And it's a shame since I really liked the animation they employed.

 

[Donald Duck 12]

It was a sad atempt to cash in on the movie.

Now, did I say I didn't like it? No, I said that it was trying to copy the movie and didn't. On the other hand it was really good. Part of it was that I belive Bendis had a huge role in it. Very few classic villains, but most of those are being saved for the movies. The new ones are better than most made for TV super-villains. It goes pretty deep and has a fair amount of humor. It should definetly move to Toonami.

 

[Strollymonster]

It went wrong when they decided to put it on MTV...it just seems like any animation (or any non-live action program) they televise is doomed.

...the only real exceptions to that are Beavis and Butthead and Daria...and maybe Celebrity Deathmatch.

Spiderman could have been great, but it might simply be due to that summer is a television wasteland, for the most part...

 

[Jeff Harris]

I know I'll probably catch hell over this, but I liked Indie. Funny thing is she filled the "Gwen Stacy" role that hasn't been seen in any of the animated incarnations. I feel the producers and writers wanted to have that "tragic love interest" and romantic rival that helps the character of Peter Parker. Heaven knows we couldn't see a "Death of Gwen Stacy" animated because the principal character in that tale, Green Goblin, was dead in the animated continuity (plus, fonts of that tale was seen in the first Spider-Man movie, only we knew that Mary-Jane would live). The creation of Indie created a character that was supposed to build up a relationship with the lovelorn Peter Parker as well as a tragic end that was inadvertantly caused by Spider-Man.

Like I said, you know they wouldn't ever attempt to try to kill off Mary-Jane, so someone had to fill that role.

But to answer the question, the series went wrong for two reasons:

- It was made for an MTV audience.
- It was too closely connected to movie continuity.

MTV should have never been considered a place to air a new animated adaptation of Spider-Man. MTV's recent track record with animated series have been spotty at best. Shows like Downtown, Undergrads, and Clone High received critical and viewer praise, but MTV cancelled them because they didn't fit in with their vision. MTV, like most networks at the time, wanted less scripted programming and more "reality" programming. And since MTV was the innovator and originator of cheaply made "reality" shows, they dropped nearly all of their remaining scripted shows. Spider-Man was one of them.

Also, the series was too closely connected to the continuity introduced by the first Spider-Man series. With a myriad of story potential and a menagerie of villians, heroes, and other strong supporting characters, the Spider-Man animated series could have been great. However, because they wanted to stay in continuity with the film series, the writers and animators were handcuffed about what they could and couldn't do, who they could and couldn't use. The series could have been great, but they were so limited in what they could do with the characters. There were only a handful of "real" villians from the comics in the series (Electro, Kingpin, Silver Sable, Lizard, and Kraven), and the newer characters didn't really click with the viewers, let alone the almost hostile reactions to Indie.

You'd think that instead of staying tied to movie continuity, they'd go the Ultimate route. I have a feeling that the next Spider-Man series will be more or less an animated version of Ultimate Spider-Man. They've always made Spider-Man more or less a college student, but never actually showcased him as a teen. Heck, even in the movies, Peter Parker didn't become Spider-Man officially until after his high-school graduation. USM basically keeps him as a teenager a little longer, and it would be perfect for animation. They already had USM's Brian Michael Bendis as a writer on the series, so animating the wall-crawler as a teenager in high-school isn't exactly a stretch. And it could have worked on MTV without being tied down to movie continuity.

Of course, that's just my four half-cents.

 

[Mister Intensity]

I liked Indy too but I do think she was too New York hipster for many people's taste (true New York 'tude really doesn't translate well on television, that's why most New York television characters come off as bland). If they used Gwen Stacy then viewers who are familiar with the comics (admittedly, a very small proportion of the audience), as well as the writers would start a dead pool and there would be a sense of figuring out when it was time to off her (if you don't believe me, see recent issues of Ultimate Spider-Man). There's a perception that Gwen Stacy has a limited life span, although I feel that keeping her around would have been more courageous, thus using her would provide no surprises. Putting Indy in that role at least provided a sense of surprise, especially since I liked the character and became attached to her, unlike the very bland interpretations of Mary Jane and Harry who came off as Midwestern Suburban kids who didn't know their way around the big city than lifelong New Yorkers.

Mister Intensity

 

[karasu]

This show tried way too hard to be hip, and that was insanely annoying. It was far too MTV. Harry was an idiot, Mary Jane was pretty dumb, nobody else even mattered. The celebrity voices didn't match the characters they played at all, the villians were poorly concieved and had lousy motivations. It's just a bad show, it seemed like it was made for nothing but money. I didn't see any passion or care in it at all. There was nothing innovative or exciting about it. Spiderman and his Amazing friends owns it lol.

 

[Ssrn53]

(true New York 'tude really doesn't translate well on television, that's why most New York television characters come off as bland).

Mister Intensity

I don't know what you mean by New york 'tude but I think that your assertion that New York characters don't translate well to TV is nonsense. What proof do you have of this? Numerous shows that have had New York characters as main characters have been successful. You may find New York characters bland but that's just you. Your statement paints New York TV characters with a broad brush and as it stands doesn't wash.

 

[Mister Intensity]

I don't know what you mean by New york 'tude but I think that your assertion that New York characters don't translate well to TV is nonsense. What proof do you have of this? Numerous shows that have had New York characters as main characters have been successful. You may find New York characters bland but that's just you. Your statement paints New York TV characters with a broad brush and as it stands doesn't wash.

One word, "Friends."

Mister Intensity

 

[Discloner]

Except that 'Friends' was insanely well recieved and liked by many....which...kind of goes against your point that the 'New York 'tude' doesn't translate well to TV.

 

[Mister Intensity]

Except that 'Friends' was insanely well recieved and liked by many....which...kind of go against your point that the 'New York 'tude' doesn't translate well to TV.

Part of my point is that it was well received because it didn't represent the "New York 'tude." It's a show that says it takes place in New York but if you weren't told that you wouldn't know. I'm saying that a certain amount of suburbanization of New York takes place when it is represented on television (of course New York has been "suburbanized" in real life in recent yearsl). Certain New York characteristics and character types don't translate well in the eyes of Middle America. New York is often portrayed as the place where in reigns and with a sense that everyplace America looks down on it and New Yorkers and their funny ways unless the "New York edge" is taken out.

Mister Intensity