I was well aware of the Spider-Man show from the 70s because I was always wondering when the next episode was going to be but even as a 10 year old, I thought it was lame.  No Super-Villains, Spider-Man (or his stunt man) couldn't swing out from a building any further than 10 feet, and the plots were boring.  I felt the Toby McGuire movie was finally the Spider-Man I always loved from the comics even if some of the details were changed.

Joey , What you say is true. The "Marvel Universe Ground Zero" begins here, and , there's some subtle references to related and unrelated Marvel characters. They did change the storyline , here and there , in terms of what happened to The Cap , and a surrounding character or two. I never saw any of those other movies because I loathe CGI. I realize there are times when it's the best , or only , option , but , don't make it the entire film, Actors and Animators and SFX people who use their hands , well , they all have to eat ,  too.....This one , by comparison , used less CGI. " Bat - Chica" IS a bit of a cult film , now , tho' I never read much about it , just saw a few pics and the great poster(Mexican lobby cards and posters RULE...Mexican postres , too. ). I just lucked into a copy. Never saw the Italian Spiderman , but I''ve seen some footage on You Tube , not the whole movie. Most people don't know there was a Spiderman TV show in the late 70's , briefly. At least they had a real stuntman (Fred Waugh , I think his name was) doing the shit work , and not a computer. I used to "Marvel" at him , literally climbing the side of The Empire State Building , and other death - defying stunts.

I'd like to see that "Bat Girl" movie you're talking about, it's kinda gathered a cult following I think. I haven't had a chance to see the latest "Captain America" film yet, but at this point, guess it's going to have to be on dvd. I understand there's quite some Marvel Comics history in it, since this film is basically "ground zero" for the Marvel Universe being planned out in future films. Speaking of foreign low budget superhero flicks, ever caught "Italian Spiderman"? That's pretty damn funny, and meant to be extra campy on purpose. They have the film split up in episodes over on You Tube.

John Battles said:

 It depends. I like the old serials of the 30's and 40's - Batman (Hilarious) , Spy Smasher , Captain Marvel , Flash Gordon , etc. I still like the '66 Batman movie. There's a seldom - seen R- Rated 70's sex comedy , "Hot Times" , featuring Archie and his gang (Without permisson , of course.)....I used  to see it on primitive cable. Wish I'd bought it when I had the chance. The early 90's Captain America and Fantastic Four movies are a riot. I liked the new Captain America movie , actually , but , it's about the only one I've watched since the '88 "Batman" movie. Love "Ghost World" , and , yes , I consider "Eightball" and "Lloyd Llewellyn" comic books , not "Graphic novels".  But , lately , I've been digging some of the Turkish unauthorized Western Superhero films , like "Killink" (Better known as Kriminal or Killing , actually a Super - villain , from Italy , I believe ...). But he FIGHTS a Captain Marvel - inspired (Rippped off.) superhero , alternately known as Flying Man or Superhero (Real original , eh.). There's many others like these (Turkey is exempt from international copyright law , or so I've read.) , but , the ultimate is generally agreed upon as "Three Mighty Men". It's about the evil Spiderman , a sadistic crime boss , bumping off any and all rival gangsters and informants who stand in the way of his planned worldwide countierfitting ring. Captain America and Santo are called to Istanbul to fight the evil Spiderman , who does'nt climb walls , but can actually reproduce himself . If killed , he mysteriously reappears !     The South Indian Superman is hilarious , but , of course ,it's 3 1/2 hours long and loaded with romantic musical numbers. In Mexico , Santo , Blue Demon , Mil Mascaras , etc. , have filled the superhero void in the movies , but they did do a "Bat Girl" flick , the title heroine wears a bikini , cape and mask made of material similar to Adam West's costume on TV. Her "Batmobile" leaves a lot to be desired , but , might I say , she does'nt.

 It depends. I like the old serials of the 30's and 40's - Batman (Hilarious) , Spy Smasher , Captain Marvel , Flash Gordon , etc. I still like the '66 Batman movie. There's a seldom - seen R- Rated 70's sex comedy , "Hot Times" , featuring Archie and his gang (Without permisson , of course.)....I used  to see it on primitive cable. Wish I'd bought it when I had the chance. The early 90's Captain America and Fantastic Four movies are a riot. I liked the new Captain America movie , actually , but , it's about the only one I've watched since the '88 "Batman" movie. Love "Ghost World" , and , yes , I consider "Eightball" and "Lloyd Llewellyn" comic books , not "Graphic novels".  But , lately , I've been digging some of the Turkish unauthorized Western Superhero films , like "Killink" (Better known as Kriminal or Killing , actually a Super - villain , from Italy , I believe ...). But he FIGHTS a Captain Marvel - inspired (Rippped off.) superhero , alternately known as Flying Man or Superhero (Real original , eh.). There's many others like these (Turkey is exempt from international copyright law , or so I've read.) , but , the ultimate is generally agreed upon as "Three Mighty Men". It's about the evil Spiderman , a sadistic crime boss , bumping off any and all rival gangsters and informants who stand in the way of his planned worldwide countierfitting ring. Captain America and Santo are called to Istanbul to fight the evil Spiderman , who does'nt climb walls , but can actually reproduce himself . If killed , he mysteriously reappears !     The South Indian Superman is hilarious , but , of course ,it's 3 1/2 hours long and loaded with romantic musical numbers. In Mexico , Santo , Blue Demon , Mil Mascaras , etc. , have filled the superhero void in the movies , but they did do a "Bat Girl" flick , the title heroine wears a bikini , cape and mask made of material similar to Adam West's costume on TV. Her "Batmobile" leaves a lot to be desired , but , might I say , she does'nt.

Has anyone seen 30 DAYS OF NIGHT? Based on the Comics by Steve Niles from IDW.

I am no gore fan and not into the new kind of Horror movies (new, that means everything later then the 1959 ;) but that thing really topped it off. Great tone, the cast works great, I wouldn't have ever thought Josh Hartnett would pin down that lead character so well. Melissa George was great to, infact everyone was.

I think it even exceeds the comic in it's directness and brutality. That said it does't fail to bring an emotional layer and tense feel to it. The vampires are no romantic undead melancholics, but rather beasts seeing humans as inferior prey. Yet, they play smart and terrible tricks on the town of Barrow, their latest hunting grounds.

 

Let's say it just struck me as a complete thing, rather then a rip off remake of the comic, or a cash in on the once again popular horror/gore genre.

 

There's a part two, but I haven't seen it and it looks like more or less lackluster compared to the first one.

Also, what about the newish DC based flicks like THE LOSERS and R.E.D.? I hadn't even read those books, so it was kind of a surprise to see them being Comic book movies. They of course take some liberties when it comes to the original stories, but what the hey.

Don't get me wrong, both are pretty cheesy action flicks, but I have to say they delivered when it comes to the action and laffs. The LOSERS even a bit more than R.E.D.

 

Angelina Jolie as Elektra, I can dig that.

FF was a weird great Comic in the beginning, I would love seeing that aspect being brought out more - in all the Marvel movies actually. But seein' where those characters have been taken since then and what is popular and what is cannon with the kids nowadays, that's not gonna happen. Also Marvel needs to restore financially, so they will not take any ART-HOUSE risks + with Disney on the gears now, we'll not see that. Those actress choices for Sue sound good!

 

I wonder if there is like a WHAT IF?! Marvel that does it all right, Jack Kirby is King and the Comics are as great as they ever were.

Rockin Rod Strychnine said:

There are people that studios THINK are marketable such as Megan Fox and there are people who are totally marketable that could totally sell tickets and still keep a good comic book film on the up side except they don't want to get stuck in a comic book movie.  Elektra could have been awesome if someone had approached Angelina Jolie (I'm totally serious) and you know what?  I would have totally excepted Brad Pitt or even Leonardo Decaprio as Johnny Blaze, the Ghost Rider(I'd have leaned more toward Brad Pitt though).  I liked the Fantastic Four movies as well but I think Katherine Heigl or Elizabeth Banks would have made better Sue Storms.  Jessica Alba is still a bit girly, and the blonde hair against tan skin just didn't work.

Spider-Man 3 WAS indeed a disappointment and am glad I waited to watch it on DVD.  I wasn't just disappointed in Sandman being conflicted. I was disappointed that they had to tie him into Ben Parker's death.  And yeah, the Lizard would have been an excellent choice instead of Venom (or even Sandman for that matter).  I didn't mind the intro of Gwen so much but to be made a stalking victim of Eddie Brock was a dumb idea (just as much as making Topher Grace Eddie Brock.  Everybody who knows their Spider-Man knows that LANCE BANNON was Parker's competitor when taking photos).  Being an interest of Harry Osborne would have made more sense.  All in all, they should have kept everything simple like the first two.  You always get the feeling that the only reason they try and stuff so many villains into a film is they don't think they are going to make a follow up.

joey fuckup said:

I agree, Aldyth, that the third Spiderman movie just wasn't that grand. A sad finish to a series that is now getting another re-vamp. My issue with the part three was the mistake of shoving too many plot points into one film. I wouldn't have brought in Gwen Stacy or Venom (his origin is too complex, and it was just too random the way it was handled in the movie), and Sandman should not have been a conflicted villain. I would have kept the Harry Osborne plot thread in, and yes, had him help Peter in the end against a rampaging Sandman, but Venom was just a waste. I heard a rumor that Marvel pushed their influence on Sam Raimi because they felt having him in the movie would sell more tickets. Whatever. Personally, I would have had Spiderman rescue JJ Jameson's son in outer space (like in the comics), where he would have had the special suit, and him reject it blah blah blah, but saved that for say part 5? It was such a waste to have introduced Dr. Connors if he wasn't going to become the Lizard! That should have been part 3! Apparently Marvel tried to interfere with Raimi's vision too much, and when he set out to do part 4, his heart wasn't in it anymore. So now they're filming a new Spiderman, retelling his story again, which I'm assuming is to fit in with this newest wave of the "Marvel Mosaic" as I like to call it.

And I'll admit, I liked the Fantastic Four movies, mainly because the director nailed the sort of goofiness that went on the comics. I hated "Elektra", loved "Daredevil", but never gave "Superman Returns" a chance. Just couldn't buy into the whole "This is part 3 to the Christopher Reeve films" selling point...Never have gotten around to "Jonah Hex" or "the Watchmen"...

Aldyth Beltane said:

This is a great question for discussion!  And a very timely one given all the summer releases of comic book based movies.  I'm a huge comic book fan, and I love that we now have the technology to do the effects well and make them look good on film.  Though what ultimately will make or break a comic adaptation is the acting and storytelling, just like in an actual comic it is the characters and story which makes or breaks a book as much as the art.

 

That said, I react on a case by case basis.  I adored the first 2 X-Men movies (though had some nit-picks with Magneto's characterization in the first one) and the first two Spider-Man movies.  The third of each completely lost it.  I was not too fond of the Fantastic Four flicks, or Daredevil and hated Elektra.  The Batman movies have always been fun, even if the first few weren't brilliant.  The Dark Knight Returns was utterly amazing.  They NAILED the characters, and Maggie G didn't even bother me too much.  The newest Superman was dreadful, bad casting, bad story, boring, tedious and kinda stupid.

Thor was an extremely gorgeous movie, and I enjoyed it, especially the cameos by other Avengers, but there wasn't a lot of "there" there.  That said, Thor wasn't a comic I ever read much, so I didn't have a clear point of reference.

The first Iron Man movie was glorious, and the acting was spot on, as was the story telling.  The second was not nearly as good, but it set up for The Avengers movie well.

 

I may be in the minority here, but I thoroughly loved both Sin City and Watchmen.  Yes, I know there were significant changes to Watchmen, and many purists take issue with that, and I *do* understand. but given the epic scope of the material, Hollywood did a far better job than many expected, and than they could have.  The actors nailed the characters, and overall it had the atmosphere, feel, and spirit of the book down perfectly.  Sin City was like watching the comic unfold on film, and I loved it!

 

Jonah Hex had so much potential to be good, and fun, and instead it was a wreckage.  If they had gotten Joe Lansdale to write the screenplay, and maybe lost Megan Fox, it would have made a huge difference.

 

I could probably write on about this for pages, and in tedious detail, so I'll stop now.

Likin' that!

My dream Magneto would have been a grey Sean Connery, RED OCTOBER like... the Eyebrows you know. That man can brood! Kinda crafted after the viscious Jim Lee Magneto in the 90's when he tore out Wolverines Adamantium.

 

Sin City, love that - no question. Watchmen is what it is, I think a Davin Fincher or David Lynch could have taken that to different lenghts when it comes to the visual scope and tone. I see the blown up superhero thing carrying into the movie, but for me, the tone of the Comic was more the one of a novel than a KRACK POW Jack Kirby story of morals and defeat and all that. The Dave Gibbons art says it all.

 

Jonah Hex, oh man! That's another thing, that Josh whatever dude, ok, but what was up whit that whole thing? Not even terrible in a good way. Lansdale should have gotten his mits in - too true.

 

Aldyth Beltane said:

This is a great question for discussion!  And a very timely one given all the summer releases of comic book based movies.  I'm a huge comic book fan, and I love that we now have the technology to do the effects well and make them look good on film.  Though what ultimately will make or break a comic adaptation is the acting and storytelling, just like in an actual comic it is the characters and story which makes or breaks a book as much as the art.

 

That said, I react on a case by case basis.  I adored the first 2 X-Men movies (though had some nit-picks with Magneto's characterization in the first one) and the first two Spider-Man movies.  The third of each completely lost it.  I was not too fond of the Fantastic Four flicks, or Daredevil and hated Elektra.  The Batman movies have always been fun, even if the first few weren't brilliant.  The Dark Knight Returns was utterly amazing.  They NAILED the characters, and Maggie G didn't even bother me too much.  The newest Superman was dreadful, bad casting, bad story, boring, tedious and kinda stupid.

Thor was an extremely gorgeous movie, and I enjoyed it, especially the cameos by other Avengers, but there wasn't a lot of "there" there.  That said, Thor wasn't a comic I ever read much, so I didn't have a clear point of reference.

The first Iron Man movie was glorious, and the acting was spot on, as was the story telling.  The second was not nearly as good, but it set up for The Avengers movie well.

 

I may be in the minority here, but I thoroughly loved both Sin City and Watchmen.  Yes, I know there were significant changes to Watchmen, and many purists take issue with that, and I *do* understand. but given the epic scope of the material, Hollywood did a far better job than many expected, and than they could have.  The actors nailed the characters, and overall it had the atmosphere, feel, and spirit of the book down perfectly.  Sin City was like watching the comic unfold on film, and I loved it!

 

Jonah Hex had so much potential to be good, and fun, and instead it was a wreckage.  If they had gotten Joe Lansdale to write the screenplay, and maybe lost Megan Fox, it would have made a huge difference.

 

I could probably write on about this for pages, and in tedious detail, so I'll stop now.

Ryan Reynolds, the man to walk both universes.

joey fuckup said:

Interesting, though I wouldn't know what to think of him doing a "box office" friendly superhero movie. I'm not saying he couldn't pull it off, it just wouldn't seem to be his genre. I'm curious to know if "Deadpool" is an alive project, and will Ryan Reynolds play him? Would there even be a need for that now? I'm guessing they could have somebody else play him since he's disfigured and all...

josta59 said:

Yeah, speaking of dark, did you know Robert Rodriguez signed on briefly to direct Deadpool? I was so excited. Though I'm much more interested in his original stories than in Sin City, so I don't know what I would've thought of his Deadpool.

It would have been a choice more true to the original material and one of course more BADASS!

Imagine the rider via the Blade director, that would have been Boss! Get's me excited just to hear it. Whatever new GR movie comes out should dwell in darkness, I mean the 90's Mark Texeira run had some pretty dark little moments in there, with all that weird New York crime shit going on (that was the Dan Ketch Rider of course).

 

 

joey fuckup said:

If "Ghost Rider" was to be reworked/revamped, I think it would be interesting to see it apart from the Marvel films, and set it during the comic's initial run, the '70's. Those comics had such a drive-in movie feel with its share of bikers, demons, and paranormal villains, that to do it as a horror/biker flick would give it a whole different attitude. I do know that David Goyer (Blade films) had initially been on board to do "Ghost Rider" and had planned to make it a very dark film in the horror genre, even thinking in terms of an "R" rating. However, Marvel wasn't too keen on that idea, especially when they knew that more tickets could be sold if they went for a "PG-13" rating. Nicholas Cage was also for a more "kid-friendly" version, saying that making the film too dark was the wrong direction (WTF?). Interesting that the guy that directed "Daredevil" did "Ghost Rider", but I think Marvel leaned heavily on him to make it more palatable so it would gross more bucks. Ya gotta sell those toys!

I totally dug that HULK movie as well!

+ What's up with all the remakes and re-ding dongs of recent movie series like Spiderman an Batman?? They are starting over with Spiderman after they started over already and made three movies?

 

I can see that that's part of the new Marvel movie universe thing with the same actors (mostly the Shield dudes showing up everywhere as an integral part) being in there. I was hesistant at first if they were gonna go thru with it, but it looks to be great and the movies were fun, so...

 

joey fuckup said:

I am probably the only person I know that liked that first "Hulk" film that Ang Lee did. I guess I just dug it as a "comic lovers art film"? I really liked the way the origin was tweaked, and that "David" Banner (from the TV series) was the father, and "Bruce" was the son. I thought it was also interesting how David became the Absorbing Man and they fought to the death at the end. Sam Elliott was perfect as Gen. Ross and I loved the face off in the desert. I haven't seen the revamped Hulk movie with Ed Norton, but I know it's part of the "Marvel Mosaic" as I like to call it, and that Marvel likes to act like the Ang Lee version never existed. And saying that the newer film isn't a sequel is a cop-out in my opinion. Obviously it is, they just wanted to distance the films and sweep the first one under the rug...I plan on watching "The Incredible Hulk" one day, when I'm bored I guess...
Rockin Rod Strychnine said:

I use to get a magazine during the early 90s called Comic Scene that had a portion of it refered to as Comic Screen which tried to hype all the movies (live or animated) that were being planned but you could tell these movies were only one or two steps above 70s TV movies.  Even the Eric Bana Hulk movie was 100 times better than what would have come out if they hadn't been shelved.

I was all over Ghost Rider, seen it five times or so, just to see that flamin' skull take out the baddies is Kickin'! + They had the original rider story put into it that was badass too. I mean seeing that old cowboy on his hellhorse all fleshed out in movieglory? Too cool!

It was total Trash for sure, the enemies had no punch or substance and seemed rather like trash material for the Rider to progress thru the movie. But you know, it has this wacky tone to it... ah I can't put my finger on it - I just love it. And yeah Nicolas Cage, not so excited about that either, but it somehow worked well for me!

I also think that way about the whole SFX thing.

 

 

Rockin Rod Strychnine said:

I like most of the new movies I've seen this past decade (I would have liked Ghost Rider as well if they had had some one besides Nicholas Cage as the character).  In many ways they aren't as fun as the stuff from the 40's - 80's but they seem much truer to the comics than they ever have before, and the effects and stunts are much better executed now than they ever could have been done in the past.  It makes you wish that comic book movies could have waited until the technology was perfected instead of hurrying to make it onto the big or small screen, but then again, it's the corniness of the past that makes those older movies fun.

 

That totally pins it down for me! I enjoy seeing that kind of Material mopping up the big screen, every company tries to make a Comic Book movie to cash in, but it's kind of cool to see it happen either way.

 

Ken said:

I take them on a case by case basis and try to have low expectations so I'm never too disappointed. Most of these movies need at least some changes to be made in appearance and story to accommodate the format of a movie as opposed to a serial book, so I kind of take that for granted.

I think my main pet peeve with comic book movies is that they're often tone deaf to the nuances of the characters or stories. The Watchmen movie for instance, has these long drawn out special effects laden fight scenes when one of the points of the original mini series is that most of these guys are just normal schmucks who like to play dress up. And all of the Batman movies seem to ignore the detective aspect of the character in favor of highlighting his gadgets.

Interesting, though I wouldn't know what to think of him doing a "box office" friendly superhero movie. I'm not saying he couldn't pull it off, it just wouldn't seem to be his genre. I'm curious to know if "Deadpool" is an alive project, and will Ryan Reynolds play him? Would there even be a need for that now? I'm guessing they could have somebody else play him since he's disfigured and all...

josta59 said:

Yeah, speaking of dark, did you know Robert Rodriguez signed on briefly to direct Deadpool? I was so excited. Though I'm much more interested in his original stories than in Sin City, so I don't know what I would've thought of his Deadpool.

Yeah, speaking of dark, did you know Robert Rodriguez signed on briefly to direct Deadpool? I was so excited. Though I'm much more interested in his original stories than in Sin City, so I don't know what I would've thought of his Deadpool.

I think with today's technology, a Spawn film in the right hands would be good. It's a dark enough backstory, and if a writer with an understanding for the character was hired, it could be grand. There is demand for darker comic book films, so I think it would need to have the envelope pushed due to the subject matter. One reason that fans were divided on "Ghost Rider" was because it wasn't dark enough.

josta59 said:

My enjoyment was partly due to the soundtrack, which is still a very unique album, and partly due to its being part of a double feature with Event Horizon at our local drive-in. I went alone and had an insanely good time, completely sober. Great memory.

My enjoyment was partly due to the soundtrack, which is still a very unique album, and partly due to its being part of a double feature with Event Horizon at our local drive-in. I went alone and had an insanely good time, completely sober. Great memory.

I had high hopes for that flick, especially since I was intrigued by Spawn's origin (I never read the comics). But honestly, it took all I had to get through the whole thing. He looked cool though! It was about as disappointing as "The Shadow" and "Darkman" (which technically isn't a comic book film, but he did get his own series and a cult following)>

josta59 said:

I remember really enjoying the Spawn film when it came out, but I just now watched the trailer again, 14 years later, and hmmm...maybe I've seen too many movies to still think that's cool.

I remember really enjoying the Spawn film when it came out, but I just now watched the trailer again, 14 years later, and hmmm...maybe I've seen too many movies to still think that's cool.

I seriously doubt Wesley Snipes would be considered at this point, anyway. I can't place the actors you're naming off, but I believe what you say. Who knows if a Black Panther film will ever get made? It's been stuck in development hell along with Iron Fist, Ant Man, Sub-Mariner, and others.
Rockin Rod Strychnine said:

I don't want to see him as Black Panther.  It's like getting Nick Cage as Ghost Rider.  My choice for Black Panther would be the actor who was in 40 Year Old Virgin and currently was No Ordinary Family (which I actually enjoyed despite being light weight) as the co star to Michael Chiclis(?)  Even better, I was watching this show called Undercovers on NBC last year and they had this German actor but of African descent.  He was quite good, I thought.

I think I remember that, actually. Given the popularity of Conan, it doesn't surprise me that Marvel would have done that...

Aldyth Beltane said:

Oddly, Conan *did* appear in the Spider-Man title Marvel Team-Up, in which Conan was somehow magically transported to modern New York.  MTU had some of the most improbably crossovers imaginable.

(I am oddly disturbed that I recall this particular bit of trivia.)

joey fuckup said:

With Spiderman being the THE flagship character for Marvel, I think the only comic book series he didn't appear in was "Conan the Barbarian". He crossed paths with everybody, and I think back in the '70's (for the most part), Spiderman had 5 different titled series. I read a rumor some time back that a fourth Spiderman movie would involve Morbius, and Blade would appear in it as well. Apparently Marvel was interested in breathing life back into the Blade franchise. There was even an industry insider joke that Wesley Snipes would portray him again because he needed the money. (Referring to his tax evasion troubles). Snipes has said that he has no desire to play Blade again, citing his displeasure with filming "Blade: Trinity". I do know that at one time, he was being considered to play Black Panther for the big screen.

I don't want to see him as Black Panther.  It's like getting Nick Cage as Ghost Rider.  My choice for Black Panther would be the actor who was in 40 Year Old Virgin and currently was No Ordinary Family (which I actually enjoyed despite being light weight) as the co star to Michael Chiclis(?)  Even better, I was watching this show called Undercovers on NBC last year and they had this German actor but of African descent.  He was quite good, I thought.

Oddly, Conan *did* appear in the Spider-Man title Marvel Team-Up, in which Conan was somehow magically transported to modern New York.  MTU had some of the most improbably crossovers imaginable.

(I am oddly disturbed that I recall this particular bit of trivia.)

joey fuckup said:

With Spiderman being the THE flagship character for Marvel, I think the only comic book series he didn't appear in was "Conan the Barbarian". He crossed paths with everybody, and I think back in the '70's (for the most part), Spiderman had 5 different titled series. I read a rumor some time back that a fourth Spiderman movie would involve Morbius, and Blade would appear in it as well. Apparently Marvel was interested in breathing life back into the Blade franchise. There was even an industry insider joke that Wesley Snipes would portray him again because he needed the money. (Referring to his tax evasion troubles). Snipes has said that he has no desire to play Blade again, citing his displeasure with filming "Blade: Trinity". I do know that at one time, he was being considered to play Black Panther for the big screen.

With Spiderman being the THE flagship character for Marvel, I think the only comic book series he didn't appear in was "Conan the Barbarian". He crossed paths with everybody, and I think back in the '70's (for the most part), Spiderman had 5 different titled series. I read a rumor some time back that a fourth Spiderman movie would involve Morbius, and Blade would appear in it as well. Apparently Marvel was interested in breathing life back into the Blade franchise. There was even an industry insider joke that Wesley Snipes would portray him again because he needed the money. (Referring to his tax evasion troubles). Snipes has said that he has no desire to play Blade again, citing his displeasure with filming "Blade: Trinity". I do know that at one time, he was being considered to play Black Panther for the big screen.

I had a Marvel Team-Up that had "Tomb of" Dracula as a guest star.  He and Spider-Man never really crossed paths except Dracula bumping his shoulder into Peter Parker because there was no room to get by (this all took place on a boat) but this was the early 70s when a lot of plots were tried and just ended up looking stupid.