I've Read Every Issue Of Stan Lee's Original Spider-Man Comics. Here's Which Movie Captures Them Best
by Devin Meenan · /FilmAfter co-creating Spider-Man with artist Steve Ditko for "Amazing Fantasy" #15, Stan Lee wrote the first 100 issues for the wall-crawler's first solo title, "The Amazing Spider-Man." Artists came and went, from Ditko to John Romita Sr. to Gil Kane, but each of the 100 issues has Lee's credit.
I've counted myself a Spider-Man fan ever since I first saw Sam Raimi's "Spider-Man 2" and then grew obsessed with reruns of the 1994 "Spider-Man" cartoon. In 2025, I decided to finally read every issue of "The Amazing Spider-Man" up through "The Night Gwen Stacy Died" (issues #121-122, by Gerry Conway and Kane), partly as research for a piece looking into the genre-defining death of Gwen Stacy, and partly to cross a huge item off my comic book reading bucket list.
I've also read plenty of Spider-Man comics besides this, but this was the first time I'd read the full Stan Lee era. A lot of superhero fans don't have that sort of patience, relying on fan wikis and YouTubers to "fill them in" on classic stories instead of reading them. That means there's a lot of received wisdom in Marvel fandom, but it's refreshing to be able to speak with firsthand authority — especially about which Spider-Man movies are actually the most faithful to the original comics.
Now, almost every Spider-Man movie pulls from the Stan Lee years: "Spider-Man 2" recreates Romita's page from "Amazing Spider-Man" #50 showing Peter Parker leaving his costume in a dumpster; "The Amazing Spider-Man" adapts the tragic murder of police captain George Stacy (Dennis Leary in the movie); and "Spider-Man: Homecoming" sees Spider-Man crushed under rubble mirroring the famous "If This Be My Destiny..." arc.
Many often cite Raimi's cinematic Spider-Man as the one that's most in tune with Stan Lee's comics. I agree ... to a point.
Sam Raimi's Spider-Man best captures the Stan Lee mood and storytelling
Sam Raimi was born in 1959, a few years before Spider-Man debuted in 1962. When directing 2002's "Spider-Man," you can tell he was looking to the Stan Lee comics he read as a boy. (As a storyteller, Raimi is a smirking showman, just like Lee.) Lee's cutting-edge-in-the-'60s "Spider-Man" comics led to films that felt vintage in tone and style.
Take J. Jonah Jameson (J.K. Simmons), who's ripped straight out of the Lee/Ditko "Spider-Man" issues, no matter that an old school newspaper publisher feels out of place in the 21st century. Even the more-criticized parts of Raimi's "Spider-Man" are in-line with Lee's vision. The patriotism, like Spidey sometimes posing near American flags, is right out of classic Marvel. And remember that contrivance in "Spider-Man 3" where Harry Osborn (James Franco) gets amnesia and forgets Peter's identity? Amnesia was Lee's go-to writing hack for getting around the fact that Green Goblin knew Peter Parker's secret identity.
Speaking of melodrama, John Romita once drew romance comics. When he started drawing "Amazing Spider-Man," he brought that flavor to the book; Romita's tenure is remembered for the love triangle of Peter Parker, Mary Jane Watson, and Gwen Stacy. Raimi's "Spider-Man" packs in that Romita-era melodrama. It also streamlines what the then-recent "Ultimate Spider-Man" comic by Brian Michael Bendis and Mark Bagley did by featuring MJ (Kirsten Dunst) and Harry as supporting characters from the start when Peter (Tobey Maguire) is in high school. (In the comics, they didn't meet until college.)
Spidey die-hards sometimes criticize the Raimi movies for turning MJ into a literal girl next door, not the spicier comics character. I've argued that only the animated "Spectacular Spider-Man" nails comic MJ, and the films' version of Peter Parker is just as distorted.
Only Andrew Garfield's Peter Parker is as prickly as the Lee/Ditko Spider-Man
Peter Parker was revolutionary for being a superhero outcast, shunned by the public as Spider-Man and at school by his classmates. Tobey Maguire plays Peter Parker as a gormless nice boy barely able to maintain a conversation. As I've written before, Peter was a much thornier character in the Stan Lee-Steve Ditko comics. He didn't shrink away when Flash Thompson would bully him — he'd insult Flash right back.
Here's a good comparison: Peter first appears in Raimi's "Spider-Man" running after the school bus that refuses to stop for him. He's a loser, but plucky. In "Amazing Fantasy" #15, Peter first appears backed against a wall and stewing in resentment against people picking on him. Raimi's movies also took out Spider-Man's sense of humor; even unmasked, comic Peter has a sharp tongue.
The only live-action Spider-Man actor who nails how angry and unpleasant Peter can be is Andrew Garfield, particularly in 2012's "The Amazing Spider-Man." That one better captures Peter's arrogance when he first gets his powers and his snarky attitude that often gets him in trouble. That said, "The Amazing Spider-Man" echoes Raimi by having Peter be slighted before he lets the robber who later kills Uncle Ben escape. But in "Amazing Fantasy" #15, Peter let the guy go out of pure selfishness.
Tom Holland's Spider-Man is more charming than Maguire's, but not as rough-edged as Garfield's. The greatest comic accuracy his movies offer is how Spider-Man exists in a shared universe. Lee's "Amazing Spider-Man" was teeming with crossovers: Spider-Man meets the Fantastic Four in issue #1, then fights Fantastic Four nemesis Doctor Doom in issue #5. Spider-Man exists in a web of superheroes, and it took six movies to realize that.
So while Garfield gets Peter Parker more right than any other live-action actor, the film that best captures the Stan Lee era of Spidey comics remains Sam Raimi's first "Spider-Man."