Web of Spider-Man #28 (1987) Peter Parker, The Spectacular Spider-Man #38 (1979)
seen from Malaysia
seen from China

seen from Finland
seen from Brazil
seen from China
seen from China

seen from China

seen from China
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia
seen from China

seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from China
seen from China
seen from China
seen from China
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom

seen from Germany
Web of Spider-Man #28 (1987) Peter Parker, The Spectacular Spider-Man #38 (1979)
The Black Cat (Felicia Hardy) was introduced along with April Maye, Boris Korpse, Bruno Grainger, Walter Hardy, and Emil Greco in Amazing Spider-Man 194, cover date July 1979. They were created by Marv Wolfman and Keith Pollard. ("Never Let the Black Cat Cross Your Path," Amazing Spider-Man 194, Marvel Comic Event)
0246: Doctor Strange (vol. 2) #42
Cover Date: August 1980 On-Sale Date: May 13, 1980
With a wonderful, textless (except for the title logo and miscellaneous legal stuff) cover of Doc fighting a fierce looking fiery dragon, we head into Chris Claremont's second and final Doc arc. We will say farewell to the delightful Madeleine St. Germaine (who mysteriously acquires a 'de' in her name in a caption), delve deeper into the life and times of the lovely Sara Wolfe, find out more about how rich Doc is and we'll be introduced to four new sorcerers who aren't the main villains. Refreshingly, Doc does fight the dragon depicted on the cover. Yay!
Barney is NOT short for Barnacle. Who started that rumor?
Erm so I've drawn hit Marvel character Barney Bushkin in one of those bunny outfits. He's not doing anything inappropriate the outfit's just a little revealing.
A Mighty Marvel Bonus Feature from Spider-Man and Hulk Weekly.
Eddie Brock Venom Aesthetic
The Venom/TASM Shared Universe
I realize that the MCU Spider-Man films are popular and that Sony definitely wants to try and tie their other Spidey-related films such as Venom into that cash-cow. And judging by the Morbius trailer, it’s apparent they want you to believe those films are all interconnected. But I’m not here to debate that, because I’m a little more interested in the idea of the Venom film fitting far better within the now seeminly-defunct Amazing Spider-Man film universe.
Initially, I thought the Amazing Spider-Man 2 and Venom weren’t internally consistent with one another due to the symbiote (or science-goo, if the TASM films had continued to borrow from the Ultimate Comics, I suppose) appearing in the OSCORP vault at the conclusion of TASM2. But, no. Turns out that was only in the trailer. If you go and watch the theatrically released film itself, the moving-goo-in-a-jar is replaced by the Rhino exo-suit. Just wanted to clear that point up.
There isn’t a whole heap of actual evidence to support the idea that the Venom film and the Amazing Spider-Man films are set within the same universe, but there is a whole heap of points to consider regarding why it *could* fit, at least at this point in time. First, the Venom film was something Sony had in the works in various shapes and forms for an extremely long time, certainly overlapping with the production of the two Amazing films and being a pet project of Avi Arad well before the films were rebooted. It’s not inconceivable that early plans were for the films to interconnect, especially when looking at the various plot threads the second Amazing Spider-Man film was loaded with, all intended to expand and spin-off into a fully-fledge film universe for Sony.
With that in mind, the decision to change the Sinister Six teaser in Amazing Spider-Man 2 to remove the previously rendered suspicious black goo seen in the trailer might even strengthen the idea of the Venom movie being originally intended to tie-in to a TASM universe. Removing the symbiote from TASM2 means the origin of the character can remain consistent with his other worldly origins later seen in Venom without further explanation. Or maybe they had the Venom script locked and didn’t want to have to rework things too much. Either way, it provided the studio flexibility in storytelling potential.
Next, Amazing Spider-Man 2 establishes that Peter Parker does in fact work for the Daily Bugle via dialogue and messages back and forth with J Jonah Jameson. We don’t get a physical appearance of the character, but the acknowledgement of JJJ’s existence provides a nice piece of connective tissue to the Venom movie’s brief John Jameson appearance. John Jameson is an astronaut and the son of the Bugle’s famous brush-topped boss. For anyone who saw the Spider-Man: The Animated Series’ adaption of the Black Suit and Venom Saga, the Venom movie’s integration of John into the symbiote’s arrival on Earth will have come as no surprise. On a side note, I’ve always felt it was a missed opportunity for Raimi’s Spider-Man 3 not to have used a similar concept especially considering they had introduced John Jameson in the previous film. But I digress.
The familial link isn’t the only piece of circumstantial evidence either, as Eddie Brock mentions an incident that occurred in New York connected to his journalism career. While it’s not explicitly stated, if like me you like to speculate, you could easily connect this to Eddie’s comic origin of misidentifying the serial killer known as the Sin Eater which led to his career going down the drain. In fact, if you accept the viral marketing material for Amazing Spider-Man 2 as canon, Eddie worked for Jameson at the Daily Bugle around 2013 and 2014, even reporting on the capture of a certain Cletus Kassady. The viral Daily Bugle page also makes mention of Anne Weying defending Curt Connors, which unless I’m mistaken, also doesn’t contradict the events of Venom. Notably, Anne refers to the this event as ‘the Daily Globe Incident’ and implies Eddie was ‘run out of New York,’ which appears to be true despite Eddie’s protests to the contrary. That said, there are around 4 years between TASM2′s setting of 2014 and Venom’s setting which seems to be 2018, at least after a few narrative time jumps.
Moving away from canon and continuity, let’s take a detour into style and presentation. As an experiment, I want you to watch the two Amazing films and the Venom movie one after the other. Now, tell me they don’t seem to have more in common in terms of visual language, narrative direction and tone. No, they aren’t identical, the 3 films are admittedly very different but in my opinion they hold much more in common with each other than they do when compared to something like the Raimi trilogy and the current MCU Spider-Man films. A good friend of mine has called the Venom movie a great 90′s superhero/antihero film and I think that’s probably the best way to describe the approach Sony took when producing the flick. By the same token, you could see broadly different visuals to the two Amazing films, despite both having the same director, and they work mostly as character pieces (or at least were intended to be before studio interference) focused on Peter and Gwen’s relationship. Heck, even Venom is arguably a character film focusing on Eddie and the Venom symbiote’s relationship! Look at goofball Eddie’s comedic moments and compare it to Peter’s physical comedy in the scene in Oscorp form TASM2 and tell me you don’t get a similar vibe.
So, even without an actual Amazing Spider-Man 3 film, maybe we did kind of get a third entry set within the same fictional universe. Or not! You decide! Unless Sony actually decides to take a risk and make their new shared universe a little more interesting by trying to bring together these and other past films, I think this is the closest we might get. It’d be a pleasant surprise if Andrew Garfield’s Spider-Man showed up at the end of Venom: Let There Be Carnage.