Amazing Spider-Man Message Board >> View Post
Post By
D. Strange

Member Since: Tue Sep 19, 2017
Posts: 170
In Reply To

Member Since: Tue Apr 04, 2017
Posts: 1,010
Subj: Complicated...
Posted: Sun Dec 03, 2017 at 07:30:13 am EST (Viewed 127 times)
Reply Subj: Did Ned Leeds Make A Good Hobgoblin, Or Was Kingsley Better?
Posted: Sat Dec 02, 2017 at 05:04:21 pm EST (Viewed 160 times)

Previous Post

I'm just wondering if people prefer the original revelation or the Kingsley one. I recently bought and reread Amazing #289 (When Ned was revealed at that time to be The Hobgoblin.), and I kind of liked the issue. Macendale was the Hobgoblin that I read about until his death, so he was kind of "My" Hobgoblin. Looking back though, he wasn't all that great in the role. I definitely prefer the original Hobgoblin. From what I understand, a lot of people didn't really like Ned as the Hobgoblin (Including editorial.). I still think that it's a pretty good issue, but one thing that bothers me is that it said that Ned became the Hobgoblin to TAKE down criminals (Such as the Kingpin.), but then went kind of crazy. BUT, in the original issues, he was pretty cold and murderous from the beginning. When he kills his informant and then kidnaps and kills Lefty Donovan. I'm not sure how that can fit, so I think that Kingsley works better. We don't really know anything about Kingsley though, so, who knows? Anyhow, what do you guys think?

I have decided to finish my Spider-Man run (up to OMD) by my next birthday in March. AS such, I have bought and re-bought comics from many different eras. Including the original Hobgoblin era.

It was a real look at how such a story should unfold. You could feel the Hobgoblin in issues he never was.

Most importantly, there were a few different possible goblins. And yes, Leeds and Kingsley were set up as possible Hobgoblins.

I think Leeds wasn't jarring, especially since Kingsley disappeared from the books towards the end.

Leeds needed to be up to something. He kept disappearing for something. At the time it made sense. In some ways he worked better.

Then came Hobgoblin Lives. The twin thing was a bit hokey, but over all, I think it worked out.

So a draw... until Slott.

Two things I need to say first:

1. I like classic Hobgoblin more than Norman Osborn (and Harry more than his dad, for that matter)

2. I stopped reading Spider-man (minus returning writers I loved and alt. realities) until the 50th anniversary, and stayed until the end of Superior. Fortunately, this included a lot of Kingsley.

I did hear about what Hobgoblin was doing however, and gave a quick read through in someone's collection.

Slott writes Hobgoblin... wrong. His kingsley seemed almost like an 80s cartoon character. A cheap hood with a gimmick, then another gimmick, who just loved to fake his own death. His ego got in the way.

The Hobgoblin from back in the day, was cold and calculating. The whole point was that his ego wasn't involved, it was all business.

He was Kingpin, with powers, tech, ambition, and a cold detachment Fisk had lost under Miller (not complaining). Yes, I would say that fit Kingsley better.

In MY collection, and MY continuity... which ends just before the marriage does... I would say it doesn't matter. Leeds COULD have worked, in some way fit the part better since Kingsley was less memorable. Kingsley was a more logical choice.

I'd shrug. But post Slott, getting his hand on him? Leeds all day.

Posted with Mozilla Firefox 52.0 on Windows Vista
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2018 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2018 by Alvaro Ortiz and Dave Galanter. Software Copyright © 2003-2018 Powermad Software