Like I said, the really bad stuff came in a very narrow window, of about 1992/93-about 95/96.  Speculator Boom is done by around 95 and we just deal with the fallout of Marvel going exclusive with Heroes World (late 94 into 95).  Bankruptcy was Dec 96 and they emerged the following Dec.  Around that time frame, we got the Marvel Knights stuff, which was head and shoulders above what the res of the line had been doing and Quesada ends up running the company, which greatly improved.  DC moved past the stunts and we started to see some improving there, with stuff like Starman, some great Vertigo material and stuff like The Golden Age, Morrison JLA, etc.

I do like the Mike Parobeck Justice Society run circa 1991-93, and also the June Brigman Supergirl from the same time (even if she was really a protoplasmic mass).

I’m still waiting for the story of our brother Crash to come out.

When David Michelinie created Venom he provided Todd McFarlane with very specific instructions for how he felt he should look and how his debut should go:

“…she starts as she looks over to a still-shadowy corner where she sees the white spider and eye-shapes from Spidey’s costume. Thinking that Peter is home, she starts to scold him gently–but stops, surprised, as she sees a white smile form beneath the eye-shapes. Not a pretty smile; a scary smile. Like that of a predator sure of a quick kill. The form then steps from the shadows and we see that it is dressed in a Spider-Man costume, but it is definitely not Peter Parker. Besides the feral smile, the man’s body is huge, massively muscled–like Arnold Schwarzenegger on a good day. MJ backs up, terrified, as the stranger reaches a hand out towards her, his lopsided animal smile stretching to the point where it almost connects behind his head, a totally inhuman gesture. Then, at last, he speaks: ‘Hi, honey…I’m home!’”

So, black, alien costume - check; massive body - check; feral, predatory smile, giant teeth, grin reaching almost back behind his head - check, check, check.  McFarlane for his part, went ahead and drew exactly that.  Of course, this is just a visual description of the character - Eddie Brock and all that went with him (well, Michelinie tied him in with Peter David's Sin Eater storyline, but he debuted with Michelinie) was the work of Michelinie.

However, Larsen for whatever reason didn't like Michelinie with whom he worked on Amazing Spider-Man following McFarlane's run.

"Erik hates me and my work, though I have absolutely no idea why. When Jim Salicrup suggested Erik and showed me some of his work, I thought it was a bit cartoony but was distinctive, and a distinctive look was something our readers had become accustomed to with Todd. So I said OK. Then during our run together, Erik wrote a letter to Wizard Magazine in which he called me a “clown” and called my work “stupid”. I later heard from more than one person that he was going around at conventions saying that Marvel didn’t have any good writers – when at the time the only Marvel writer he was working with was me. Like I said, I haven’t a clue as to why Erik has this seething dislike for me, but even if I felt the same way about him or his work I’d never say so in print or in public. But perhaps my idea of professional behavior has become outdated."

Beyond badmouthing Michelinie when presumably promoting Spider-Man at conventions and the like, Larsen went out of his way to write a letter (referenced in your link, but not contained therein) in which he does refer to Michelinie as a "clown".  Actually, it's a bit worse than that.  "He'd claim he created Spider-Man too, if he could get away with it", "I'll give Dave co-credit for creating Eddie Brock... but that's not much to crow about", Brock is "DUMB", and goes on to insult Michelinie's writing abilities by claiming that "the whole Venom/Spider-Man conflict could be resolved in two panels of half-way thought out dialogue, if only a writer capable of such a feat could be given such an assignment".

Larsen also claims that all Michelinie did was put a "big guy" in the alien costume and credits McFarlane for the "grinning face...fangs, slobber, long teeth, and claws" when it was Michelinie who devised all of this with the exception of the "slobber" and "fangs" (although I would argue that Michelinie's description of Venom as "feral" and "predatory" suggest the latter). 

I think the best indication of Larsen's animosity towards Michelinie is the fact that Larsen will in interviews argue that Venom's biggest selling feature is his crazy tongue and teeth and cites that as exhibit A as proof that McFarlane created the character.  Why is this the "best indication of his animosity"?  Because McFarlane didn't draw Venom with a crazy tongue - Larsen did.  In other words, Larsen would rather turn down the credit for that distinctive visual characteristic of Venom and give it to someone else, rather than see Michelinie get credit for a character which was a proven success without it.

I'm not crazy about Venom or Eddie Brock or alien symbiotes - in fact, I think outer space stuff like this takes a lot away from Spider-Man's milieu - but I do think if a character is successful, then that character's creator should be properly credited and not have it stolen from him by a guy who helps run a company which pretends to champion creators rights just because he didn't like having to draw his stories. 

Also, and it's probably petty of me to say this, but when Larsen was freed from the shackles of having to pencil Michelinie's work and got to write his own material, his stories were dreadful.  Michelinie wrote a great Sinister Six storyline in Amazing and when Larsen got the Spider-Man title all to himself, he decided to write the same story but as "a writer capable of such a feat" as he would put it and if you want a comic which epitomizes the worst of the 90's here it is - Spider-Man with giant guns and all - simply because Larsen has a problem with Michelinie, the source of which to this day, remains a complete mystery to Michelinie.

Thank you. I shall read all of that thread. 

Everybody jumps on the it was sooooo bad band wagon much too quickly. The 90's had it's hare of bad just like any other decade has had. It's much better to emphasize the GOOD for others to find and enjoy.

Starlin delivered us the Infinity Gauntlet.
Superman died at the hands of Doomsday.
Danny Ketch's Ghost Rider fired on down the road.
Books of Magic were opened
Spider-Girl started off the whole A-Next generation of Marvel heroes.
Mandman crazily leaped into adventures.
A group of New Warriors teamed up.
A Darkhawk flew the skies.
Marv was hitting it hard in Sin City.
A Squirrely Girl premiered.
A bunch of WildC.A.T.S. were on the prowl.
A Dragon of Savage proportions was kicking butt and taking names.
For better or worse Harley Quinn debuts in comic book form.
A demon Spawn was set loose upon the world.
From 2099 a new Spider-Man swung forth alongside others.
The Kree brother and sister Vell came into their own.
A Ghost was haunting Comic's Greatest World.
A Milestone of hero's was created causing some Static shocks.
Steel showed us how to be super as Superman.
A Prime bunch of heroes were hanging out around Malibu.
A really Super boy Kon-El was seen around town.
The Impulse of another Allen running around town.
A Valiant host of heroes sprung forth.
A Knight of the Stars named Jack shined brightly.
One Hell of a Boy would strike fear into demon hearts.

And that is just a sampling off the top of my head. Shout out the good and ignore the bad I say!!!