|
Post by sharkar on Jan 4, 2010 18:46:37 GMT -5
I´ve got that issue #80 now here in my hands. It looks like an normal Avengerscomic, like my other old Avengerscomics from that time (the ´70 th). The quality of the paper, the advertisement, the imprint, the smell, the letters of the readers to the editor, the imprint (imprint: is this the right english/american word for it?) and the "Approved by the comic code". I haven´t got any clue. Who may help me??? Michidiers, I think I've read about this in an old Overstreet Guide. Based on the image you've posted and the subsequent info you've provided, and since it conspicuously lacks the American 15-cent price, this is probably an American edition that was published in the US...but intended for foreign newsstand distribution. Apparently not a lot of these "variants" were published, at least not back in 1970, when Avengers #80 first appeared- - so you've secured a pretty cool copy! ;D
|
|
|
Post by sharkar on Jan 5, 2010 12:01:50 GMT -5
I looked online for some more info and I came across this Iron Man cover with the 1/- designation in the corner box: Apparently these are known as "pence variants": in the '60s and '70s, Marvel produced these in the US at the same time as the "regular" issue, but a small percentage of the print run would have a different cover/corner box. These were intended for UK distribution. Some of the "pence variants" contained an actual pence price (back then 7 or 9 pence usually) while others displayed the 1/- we see on the Iron Man and Avengers comics (these were for newsstands and the seller would just slap a price sticker on them). Just curious, Michidiers, at the bottom of your Avengers #80's page 1, in the indicia, does it state "Printed in the USA by World Color Press, Inc., Sparta, Illinois 62286?" Is there anything different or additional listed, such as a distributor in the UK? (from my copy of Avengers #80)
|
|
comaboy
Great Lakes Avenger
Posts: 34
|
Post by comaboy on Jan 6, 2010 9:47:43 GMT -5
Totally OT: I like that Iron Man cover.
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Jan 6, 2010 20:15:28 GMT -5
Yes, that was my OT reaction as well. Man, great cover.
HB
[afterthought]
In fact, is it maybe a John Buscema cover, Shar? It has that arms-and-legs-as-far-as-possible-from-the-body thing goin' on. And something about the scattering debris says "JB" to me.
Boy, this really is swerving madly off of the topical highway, as it were, and careening down into the ravine of tangential associations, isn't it? Sorry, Mich.
HB
|
|
|
Post by michidiers on Jan 7, 2010 12:53:44 GMT -5
@hb: It doesn´t matter, I´ve deliberated the last days over the artist of the cover, too. My conclusion: Jack Kirby @shakar, before I forget: The indicia of this #80 is exactly the same as my #81 with the normal 15ct-price in the corner-box.
|
|
|
Post by sharkar on Jan 7, 2010 18:27:44 GMT -5
@@shakar, before I forget: The indicia of this #80 is exactly the same as my #81 with the normal 15ct-price in the corner-box. Interesting...thanks, Michidiers. So your "pence variant" copy is identical in all respects to the comic sold here in the US- -except for the cover. From what I can piece together, Marvel would print a large number of copies with one cover (the US cover), then would "stop the presses" ;D and then would print the (small) remainder of issues with the variant cover. And Comaboy, HB and Michidiers--I wholeheartedly agree with all of you about Iron Man #13--what a cool cover! (Btw, it's Tuska. )
|
|
|
Post by michidiers on Jan 10, 2010 6:57:19 GMT -5
Thank you all for the replys to my question! My next reading was: US Avengers #158 “When Avengers clash”The last weeks were very exhausting for Vision. Seveal times he had to ponder about his artificial mind, his artificial body and his artificial feelings. After smashing the “stone” Black Knight” (AV #157) he freezed over the debris of the once stone-Black Knight and ponders about the Knights last words: “Vision, a thing of synthetic flesh”, animated by scientific means and imbued with the brain patterns of the once lost Wonder Man! “Dripping hollows out rock”: As his wife and Wonderman enters the room together, walking arm in arm (the Witch is injured), Vision flips out. It's the last straw that breaks the camel's back. A bad brotherfight Vison vs. Wonderman begins. The fight breaks after a while only as Iron Man closes it as the chairman of the Avengers. He can´t believe it, is this what the Avengers come to? Wallowing in own troubles, while other need help? The situation interrrupted. A request for aid enters: A foe named „Graviton“ occupied a scientific research instititute in the Canadian Rockys and has taken hostages. The Avengers intervenes and attacks. But they are outplayed to the force of his gravitypowers . „Graviton“ is stonger, the Avenger are beatened… Visons mindless violence against Wonderman is a conclusion of the occurences about him and his thoughts in the last issues. I´m waiting in suspense, how the Avengers will deal with that problem of violence between the teammates… The coverartist: Jack Kirby, I suppose?!
|
|
|
Post by sharkar on Jan 11, 2010 22:28:37 GMT -5
My next reading was: US Avengers #158 “When Avengers clash”... ... The coverartist: Jack Kirby, I suppose?! I am getting such a kick out of seeing these Kirby covers! When Jack returned to Marvel (circa 1975), he worked mostly on his own projects like the Celestials, the Eternals, and on more traditional features such as Captain America and Black Panther. In addition, he also did an awful lot of covers during this time for various books such as the Avengers (though the Avengers Kirby covers are coming to an end) and the FF.
|
|
|
Post by michidiers on Jan 30, 2010 6:51:46 GMT -5
My last reading: US Avengers #159„Siege by stealth and storm“Continuation from #158: The Avengers are helpless against the power of „Graviton“. He immobilisizes and pins them to a slab by his proper degree of intensified gravity. Only with the come to the rescue of Thor and The Black Panther the Avengers can get free. With united powers they are able to beat the villian. In a last huge effort Graviton mobilizes his uncontroled power and alters into a little Black Hole. Everything around is beeing pulled toward Graviton. His flying fortess, a part of the natural landscape called „Sky-Island“, seems to fold up around him. It fragments fused and compacted by a force beyond imaging until a enormous mass has been compressed into a small, incredably dense sphere and falls as a litte ball down to New York. When it hits Manhattan, the shockwave will shake NY like an earthshake! The Avengers break the impact with theyr united powers by catching the „ball“ together and throwing it into the Atlantic Ocean. The menace is all over. My opinion: I´ve read and seen better Avengerstorys...
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Jan 31, 2010 7:07:52 GMT -5
I think your assessment of this issue is pretty much on the money, Mich. The plot is quite sloppy and unfocused, and relies entirely on luck, coincidence and improbability to ultimately save the day on at least a couple of fronts. The Avengers, despite their efforts, did absolutely nothing to save the day here (other than catch that ultra-dense sphere as it fell to the earth--- the threat of which is EXTREMELY dubious, I'm pretty sure, if one closely examines the laws of physics.). Graviton failed simply because of his own weakness of character, and sudden, unexplained inability to control his own powers. Judy didn't die only because Jarvis happened to disobey orders at the right moment AND turned into an ace rocket-sled pilot. Yeesh. Very 1964. The art was actually okay for me. Good ol' dependable Sal Buscema at his most. . . well, dependable. He was everywhere during this period. Not terribly exciting, but tells the story clearly, and everyone looks like themselves. He's the well-made grilled cheese sandwich of Comic Book Artists (actually, he's better than that--- let's say the finely assembled, medium-rare bacon cheeseburger.).
(Okay, now I'm making myself hungry. . . )
But I generally breathed a sigh of relief when he popped up as a fill-in artist, and I never had a problem w/ Pablo Marcos' inking. So I'd grade the art a solid B.
Ultimately, Shooter created a villain here that I think must have proved tougher than he realized once he got about halfway into writing the story, and then I swear he didn't know where to go with it.
HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Jan 31, 2010 7:16:05 GMT -5
Ha! you know what I just noticed? The outfit that the apparent "Judy" is wearing on the cover has NOTHING whatsoever to do with the rather absurd uniform/jumpsuit she wears throughout the story! I think by this point in their history Marvel had gotten largely past that kind of silly mistake. . . but clearly anything's possible when deadlines get rushed. . .
HB
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Feb 1, 2010 13:33:54 GMT -5
The new Essential Avengers edition is out now (yay!) and this early Graviton issue is in it. I agree that the story sucked. I barely remembered it from years ago but now that I re-read it, I know why! I don't have the book in front of me now--but this Graviton story seems incredibly weak compared to the great stuff that came immediately before it, when Hellcat joined the team. Was this a different writer or something? Things really pick up again afterwards though.
|
|
|
Post by michidiers on Feb 3, 2010 10:28:07 GMT -5
bobc & HB:
I´ve pondered about my readings of the last two or three years about the Avengers, the original US Avengers since the issue #100 until #158 (the others, #1 - #99 I read 30 years ago). I come to the conclusion that these last two issues #157/158 were the weakest of all 58 issues from #100 to #158!
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Feb 3, 2010 11:30:22 GMT -5
You're probably right Mich (don't have the books in front of me). I've been collecting the Avengers since I was a kid in the mid 70's and it is a fact that quality went up and down and up and down over the years, needless to say. But as I was reading the latest Essential Avengers edition, I was really enjoying revisiting those old stories up until the Graviton storyline. What made it even worse is the fact that I incorrectly thought this Graviton story was the later Graviton story, which really kicked azz. This later Graviton storyline was in a great Avengers era with great art by John Byrne, before he went bonkers.
|
|
|
Post by sharkar on Feb 3, 2010 20:32:35 GMT -5
...this early Graviton issue is in it. I agree that the story sucked. I barely remembered it from years ago but now that I re-read it, I know why! I don't have the book in front of me now--but this Graviton story seems incredibly weak compared to the great stuff that came immediately before it, when Hellcat joined the team. Was this a different writer or something? Things really pick up again afterwards though. The Patsy Walker Hellcat was part of the Steve Englehart era, but there was an editorial shake-up circa Avengers #150 or so; and Englehart felt compelled to leave (according to what he says on his website). So back then the remainder of his Avengers work appeared in #152, and after he left Conway wrote a few issues and then Shooter settled in as the principal Avengers writer with #156...Shooter was #159's writer (as HB noted in an earlier post). The new Essential Avengers edition is out now (yay!) Thanks for the heads up! A few years ago when I got back into comics I set about buying as many back issues of FF, Avengers and X-Men issues that I could find, but #159 is actually one of the few issues I never got around to buying...so I guess my next purchase will be Essential Avengers #7! ;D
|
|
|
Post by sharkar on Feb 3, 2010 20:53:08 GMT -5
I think your assessment of this issue is pretty much on the money, Mich. The plot is quite sloppy and unfocused, and relies entirely on luck, coincidence and improbability to ultimately save the day on at least a couple of fronts. The Avengers, despite their efforts, did absolutely nothing to save the day here (other than catch that ultra-dense sphere as it fell to the earth--- the threat of which is EXTREMELY dubious, I'm pretty sure, if one closely examines the laws of physics.). Graviton failed simply because of his own weakness of character, and sudden, unexplained inability to control his own powers. Judy didn't die only because Jarvis happened to disobey orders at the right moment AND turned into an ace rocket-sled pilot. Yeesh. Very 1964. You know, your description actually sounds like Shooter's early Legion work (from the mid-late 1960s); he used coincidence at times, or deus ex machina endings, or the villains would be vanquished by someone or something other than the Legion. I remember liking his Legion stories a lot (even though they seemed contrived at times) because they weren't the standard "heroic efforts always triumph over evil" fare. Of course I was a kid back then; now as a somewhat more mature--and presumably wiser --adult, I can see more flaws in those Legion stories, and I'd bet Shooter probably does too. He was, after all, only in his mid-teens when he wrote those '60s stories.
|
|
|
Post by sharkar on Feb 3, 2010 21:22:55 GMT -5
Ha! you know what I just noticed? The outfit that the apparent "Judy" is wearing on the cover has NOTHING whatsoever to do with the rather absurd uniform/jumpsuit she wears throughout the story! You know, on closer inspection it actually looks to me like she was wearing NOTHING on the cover to begin with...she looks like her body was sketched in sans clothing (there's no indication of any fabric texture, clothing folds at the elbows or knees, for example; plus is that her navel?)... and later on someone (the inker, Giacoia? Or Romita, or someone else in production?) noticed this and quickly added a few lines to give the appearance of a cute little costume. I think by this point in their history Marvel had gotten largely past that kind of silly mistake. . . but clearly anything's possible when deadlines get rushed. . . ...or when you have a cover artist who's not acquainted with the details of the issue's story or supporting characters, as was probably the case here; Gil Kane may only have been given the barest of instructions, such as a quick description of the scene Marvel wanted depicted on the cover.
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Feb 3, 2010 21:23:50 GMT -5
[But what strikes me about the cover's "Judy" is that she looks like her body was sketched in sans clothing (there's no indication of clothing texture, clothing folds at the elbows or knees, for example; plus is that her navel?)... and later on someone (the inker, Giacoia? Or Romita, or someone else in production?) noticed this later on and quickly added a few lines to give the appearance of clothing. Wow, naked damsels in distress?? For purely academic reasons, I frantically scrolled down to take another look at the cover. And. . . I think you're half-right. To my eye, it looks like Gil drew her with very brief bikini trunks, and a bustier-thingy (sort of like a Conan dams-in-dist). And some cover-editor/art-director type may have had the colorist take a more conservative route by coloring over her amply-exposed midriff as well. I mean, truly-- no competent artist of the time would knowingly draw a naked woman right on the cover. . . would they? Or would they? End of Hulk #169 into the splash page of #170 led to an endless letters page debate about the possible use of nudity in comics. (And I'll leave that cryptic reference hanging to see if anyone besides me knows what I'm referring to. Sheesh-- I suppose I could always head back to my Lonely Hulk Corner.) HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Feb 3, 2010 21:52:26 GMT -5
bobc & HB: I´ve pondered about my readings of the last two or three years about the Avengers, the original US Avengers since the issue #100 until #158 (the others, #1 - #99 I read 30 years ago). I come to the conclusion that these last two issues #157/158 were the weakest of all 58 issues from #100 to #158! Yep, I'm like Bobc-- where a lot of these storylines will blend together (or be forgotten entirely) if there's not much to distinguish them. But I do think these couple of issues are a bit of a trough (although there are some questionable filler-issues coming in the next 20 issues or so), and the book picks up wonderfully very soon. Shooter gets a nice handle on a lot of the characters and creates some enjoyable interaction. The artwork with Byrne is terrific, and even when he's not there, the subs are quite capable (particularly S.Buscema & Janson, and even Dave Wenzel and Pablo Marcos). What does come up very quickly is a battle with COUNT NEFARIA. And not only does he LOOK just like Graviton, but he's also pretty much at the same level of unbeatability. I believe Thor even comes in at the last minute again to try to save the day. Until I checked a few minutes ago, I had once again forgotten that it wasn't a second Graviton story-! It's a much better story, but still sparks confusion. And there's also the whole Guardians of the Galaxy/Michael/Korvac saga- which is a complex story as told in a simpler time. It's also a prime example of how NOT decompressing a story too far can make for better month-to-month story-telling. Ah, there's good stuff ahead for you, Mich. Kinda envy the fact that you're about to wade into it! HB
|
|
|
Post by sharkar on Feb 3, 2010 22:13:26 GMT -5
The art was actually okay for me. Good ol' dependable Sal Buscema at his most. . . well, dependable. He was everywhere during this period. Not terribly exciting, but tells the story clearly, and everyone looks like themselves. He's the well-made grilled cheese sandwich of Comic Book Artists (actually, he's better than that--- let's say the finely assembled, medium-rare bacon cheeseburger.). But I generally breathed a sigh of relief when he popped up as a fill-in artist, and I never had a problem w/ Pablo Marcos' inking. So I'd grade the art a solid B. During this time Sal usually did just breakdowns/layouts (and not full pencils), which is one reason why he was able to be "everywhere." (Marvel used Kirby in the same way in the mid-'60s--Kirby was laying out several features for other artists in addition to doing full pencils for FF, Cap and Thor; and at some point John Buscema just did layouts/breakdowns on his superhero assignments. By providing rough pencils, the layout/breakdown artist was essentially doing the plotting and pacing of the story.) So the Sal work you see here probably contains a hefty dose of Marcos, as the inker had to provide a lot more in the way of the finished art. It's why, IMO, Sal's later art looks so different from what he did in the late '60s early '70s.
|
|
|
Post by sharkar on Feb 4, 2010 18:50:46 GMT -5
And. . . I think you're half-right. To my eye, it looks like Gil drew her with very brief bikini trunks, and a bustier-thingy (sort of like a Conan dams-in-dist). And some cover-editor/art-director type may have had the colorist take a more conservative route by coloring over her amply-exposed midriff as well. I mean, truly-- no competent artist of the time would knowingly draw a naked woman right on the cover. . . would they? Or would they? Oh, I doubt this was intentional...I think Kane--the King of Covers--just drew the cover, put it aside (without completing it) and forgot about it as he rushed off to do his next cover assignment. End of Hulk #169 into the splash page of #170 led to an endless letters page debate about the possible use of nudity in comics. (And I'll leave that cryptic reference hanging to see if anyone besides me knows what I'm referring to. Haven't read those specific issues (and I really should get some more Hulk back issues), but I'm guessing you're--er, harping on Betty's attire/transformations here.
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Feb 4, 2010 19:55:55 GMT -5
I never liked Gil Kane. It's hard to imagine anyone drawing stiffer anatomy. Oh well to each his own.
Re: Graviton's Judy. The mixture of her whiny personality and ridiculous get-up made me happy when she finally hurled herself off the floating island. I suppose we were all supposed to be traumatized like Graviton, but Judy's musk ox hairdo alone made me hope she had paid the ultimate price for gross and willful fashion violations.
Her character, like the story, was cheap.
|
|
|
Post by michidiers on Feb 6, 2010 9:10:15 GMT -5
I like Gil Kane, especially his Spidey-run at ASM 100 - ... .
Back to the Avengers: I suppose, the next issue # 160 (The Trial, Grim Reaper) will be better.
But first I have to finish my current reading, Grant Morrisons Invisibles. It´s a very difficult stuff...
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Feb 6, 2010 9:54:17 GMT -5
I always liked Gil Kane, too--- but I must confess that his figures always had this odd look to me-- like they were being drawn from those posable, jointed wooden dolls that folks use in art class.
Also, my buddy and I ALWAYS poked fun at his trademark "looking up at the underside of people's noses" POV. Heh. With the deep-shadowed nostrils, and all.
Think he must have been heavily influenced by that "under the coffee table POV" shot in PSYCHO. . .
HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Feb 7, 2010 15:42:20 GMT -5
[ End of Hulk #169 into the splash page of #170 led to an endless letters page debate about the possible use of nudity in comics. (And I'll leave that cryptic reference hanging to see if anyone besides me knows what I'm referring to. Haven't read those specific issues (and I really should get some more Hulk back issues), but I'm guessing you're--er, harping on Betty's attire/transformations here. Ah, yes, yes, yes-- even if you're just perusing the covers, you'll notice that Betty is that Harpy creature, which is naturally devoid of clothing (having feathers and a mostly-avian torso). This was true in the story as well. Betty transforms back to human in the crisis at the end of the issue, and is rescued (obviously sans any clothing at all) by Bruce just in time for both of them to fall out of the giant airship they're in and into the sky. That's the end of #169. Splash of #170 is, oh, 5 seconds later. . . and Betty has somehow wrapped herself up (mid fall) in a piece of scrap tarp, or sheet, or something. Still plummeting to their doom, mind you. There was a delightful howl of outrage on the letters pages about this hopelessly obvious contrivance, and it led to a long, long discussion about the proper place for nudity- and sexual content- in modern mass-market comic books. Ultimately, of course, the final pronouncement from Marvel was that they had to honor the strictures of the comics code, even if it meant taking artistic (and editorial) license in some situations. It was a much simpler time, indeed. To some degree, I do kind of miss some of the restrictions the code imposed in those days. My daughter has a 4th grade friend who she says is a HUGE fan of the New Avengers. I think back to some of the stuff I've read & seen in that title (the entire team hanging naked and barely concealed in the Savage Land; that Skrull being horribly tortured to death by Masque; the extremely coarse language-- just to name a few things), and I can't imagine this being appropriate stuff for a fourth-grader at all. And I'm sure the vast majority of parents have no idea that a title they recognized as "kid-safe" in their youth has since become fare appropriate for teens & adults only. . . Whoops-- went off on an editorial rant--- HB
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Feb 8, 2010 9:01:03 GMT -5
Oh. My. God. Humanbelly--I was going to say the exact same thing about how his figures looked like those posable wood figures that some people try to use to learn how to draw human anatomy but I thought nobody would know what I was talking about.
Eerie.
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Feb 8, 2010 9:35:41 GMT -5
Oh. My. God. Humanbelly--I was going to say the exact same thing about how his figures looked like those posable wood figures that some people try to use to learn how to draw human anatomy but I thought nobody would know what I was talking about. Eerie. Good heavens. Do you. . . do you think we've hit upon a true fact? Is Gil Kane still alive? Do we dare ask him? HB
|
|
|
Post by sharkar on Feb 8, 2010 19:53:10 GMT -5
Haven't read those specific issues (and I really should get some more Hulk back issues), but I'm guessing you're--er, harping on Betty's attire/transformations here. Ah, yes, yes, yes-- even if you're just perusing the covers, you'll notice that Betty is that Harpy creature, which is naturally devoid of clothing (having feathers and a mostly-avian torso). This was true in the story as well. Betty transforms back to human in the crisis at the end of the issue, and is rescued (obviously sans any clothing at all) by Bruce just in time for both of them to fall out of the giant airship they're in and into the sky. That's the end of #169. Splash of #170 is, oh, 5 seconds later. . . and Betty has somehow wrapped herself up (mid fall) in a piece of scrap tarp, or sheet, or something. Still plummeting to their doom, mind you. There was a delightful howl of outrage on the letters pages about this hopelessly obvious contrivance, and it led to a long, long discussion about the proper place for nudity- and sexual content- in modern mass-market comic books. Ultimately, of course, the final pronouncement from Marvel was that they had to honor the strictures of the comics code, even if it meant taking artistic (and editorial) license in some situations. Thanks for the details; the scenario sounds hilarious. This--er, well-worn (or not ;D) contrivance has been a theme on a variation for quite some time, at least back in the Age of Innocence: for example, since Bruce was usually clad in some other--and sizes smaller--attire before transforming into the much-larger Hulk, readers frequently asked where the Hulk's purple pants came from. Marvel's cheeky response: the Comics Code! Does anyone have the Avengers trade paperback edition (a Marvel Ages imprint) called "Earth's Mightiest Heroes", which includes Avengers #162/The Bride of Ultron story? In this story Jan is strapped down as Ultron transfers her brainwaves into the newly-created Jocasta. In the original comic, during the brainwave transference process Jan is clearly meant to be naked (we see her bare shoulders, arms, navel and legs)... but in this reprint edition, someone's added a line around the base of her neck and her body is colored an olive green shade, so now she appears to wearing some clothing (a bodysuit). Since this Marvel Age book is emblazoned with an "All Ages" tagline on its cover, I guess someone figured they'd better protect the kiddies by putting some clothes on Jan!
|
|
|
Post by sharkar on Feb 8, 2010 20:28:31 GMT -5
Oh. My. God. Humanbelly--I was going to say the exact same thing about how his figures looked like those posable wood figures that some people try to use to learn how to draw human anatomy but I thought nobody would know what I was talking about. Eerie. Good heavens. Do you. . . do you think we've hit upon a true fact? Is Gil Kane still alive? Do we dare ask him? Kane died about a decade ago. IMO he's a master of anatomy and I consider his work similar to John Buscema's in this regard--as they matured, they both seemed inclined to draw the human body in stretched out/splayed poses...they continually experimented with the body, in other words. I admit that for me Kane was an acquired taste; when I was a kid I'd see some of his work here and there but it didn't make much of an impression on me one way or the other; it wasn't beautiful (as Buscema's always was) or polished or exciting enough. It almost seemed too gritty. But now I'm entranced by Kane's work; I love his character faces, and I love those noses! And his bodies look at once athletic and balletic to me. He's at his best when he draws the human body unencumbered by extraneous details or costume frills: look at his 1960s Green Lantern, Atom, Batgirl (I don't have that much exposure to much of his Marvel work, other than his covers). Some of my favorite Kane covers from 1960s DC--he drew a very flexible Atom (and yes, I can see why you guys are likening Kane's poses to those of art dummies)! EDIT: added better links to covers
|
|
|
Post by michidiers on Feb 10, 2010 3:52:12 GMT -5
To some degree, I do kind of miss some of the restrictions the code imposed in those days. My daughter has a 4th grade friend who she says is a HUGE fan of the New Avengers. I think back to some of the stuff I've read & seen in that title (the entire team hanging naked and barely concealed in the Savage Land; that Skrull being horribly tortured to death by Masque; the extremely coarse language-- just to name a few things), and I can't imagine this being appropriate stuff for a fourth-grader at all. And I'm sure the vast majority of parents have no idea that a title they recognized as "kid-safe" in their youth has since become fare appropriate for teens & adults only. . . Whoops-- went off on an editorial rant--- HB @ HB: Do you know number of the issue ? I don´t know it and I would like have a look at the cover-image.
|
|