Superman 651

[nightwing]

I still haven't picked this one up yet, but I loved the first two issues.

At this point the best I can hope for is comics I find an entertaining read before I hide them from the kids.  I agree it's too bad there's almost nothing out there I'd want to see youngsters exposed to, but that's a battle we lost a long time ago.

[Genis Vell]

I agree with NotSuper.
And I (as you all, I think!) hate violence in comics.

[Kurt Busiek]

I'm still wondering where the two people falling to their death are.

There are refrigerators that fall to their presumed electronic death, yes, but I don't think I'm eaten up with rank mechanical prejudice if I say that refrigerators with robo-bits sneaked into them by the Prankster are not people.

kdb

[Uncle Mxy]

2 guards have their brains sucked out and eaten;

Their blood sucked out, actually.  Fleas drink blood, they don't eat brains.  And I plotted that bit.

Sounds like someone has either seen too much of the Starship Troopers movie, or not enough.  It's a guilty pleasure for me, and Michael Ironside's "They sucked his brains out." line was a highlight.

[Great Rao]

I'm still wondering where the two people falling to their death are.

I could be misreading this one, and I was willing to give it the benefit of the doubt until the rest of the stuff started showing up later in the issue - like, on the next page.

Page 9, panel 6.  I figure if there was supposed to be a rescue or a save, it doesn't count unless we actually see it.

But I was serious when I asked about the Comics Code Authority seal - this issue had the CCA logo on it, and I did not want to see the gore, cruelty and suffering that those guards went through, nor see Lex rip out the Kryptonite Man's heart in such a "heartless" (hah!) manner.  If I had known in advance that the comic contained such material, which I was certainly not expecting based on the previous 2 issues, I would not have bought it.  So who is in charge of adding the CCA seal, and what are the current guidelines?  Having it on the cover of this issue was extremely misleading.

[Kurt Busiek]

I'm still wondering where the two people falling to their death are.

I could be misreading this one, and I was willing to give it the benefit of the doubt until the rest of the stuff started showing up later in the issue - like, on the next page.

Page 9, panel 6.  I figure if there was supposed to be a rescue or a save, it doesn't count unless we actually see it.

That's Green Lantern and Hawkgirl, who can both fly, and who are both seen to be fine the next time we see them.

But I was serious when I asked about the Comics Code Authority seal - this issue had the CCA logo on it, and I did not want to see the gore, cruelty and suffering that those guards went through, nor see Lex rip out the Kryptonite Man's heart in such a "heartless" (hah!) manner.

There's nothing in this issue that wouldn't have passed the Code in the mid-1970s, though.  TOMB OF DRACULA passed the Code, after all.

Since nobody actually falls to their deaths, and since Metallo's not dead and there's no actual "gore" involved in pulling a radioactive rock out of a cybernetic housing, your objectionable scenes boil down to guards who get their blood sucked out by monster fleas, and that's not a scene the Code would have objected to since it was revised in the early 1970s.

If I had known in advance that the comic contained such material, which I was certainly not expecting based on the previous 2 issues, I would not have bought it.

As noted, the first issue had two people burned to death in a lab explosion, a man beaned with a chunk of rock and our hero beaten viciously by the bad guy.

So who is in charge of adding the CCA seal, and what are the current guidelines?

The books are submitted to the Code before publication, and they accept, reject or ask for changes as they see fit.  The 1989 version of the Code can be seen at:

http://www.geocities.com/athens/8580/cca3.html

I don't know if that's the latest version, though.

Having it on the cover of this issue was extremely misleading.

I disagree.  You don't like what was in it, but that doesn't make it "misleading."  There's nothing in the book that is out of line with material that's been passing the Code for decades, so it's thoroughly in keeping with accepted practice, and shouldn't be misleading to anyone.

The Code was first revised in 1972 (or thereabouts).  That's over three decades ago.

kdb

[Great Rao]

That's Green Lantern and Hawkgirl, who can both fly, and who are both seen to be fine the next time we see them.

Well, blow me down!  So it is.

There's nothing in this issue that wouldn't have passed the Code in the mid-1970s, though.  TOMB OF DRACULA passed the Code, after all.

Well, I thought I was buying SUPERMAN, not TOMB OF DRACULA.

Perhaps I've just got a lower tolerance for this sort of stuff than I used to.  Or perhaps most other people now have a higher tolerance than they used to.  But either way, it didn't feel the same to me.  It wasn't really the violent acts per se, it was more the attitude behind them.

[MatterEaterLad]

I, myself am kind of glad that Kurt shows up around here and he's not beset by as many millions of questions of "what's happening next?" or 'why don't you do 'this or that?' "...

Nevertheless, for better or worse, I'm a Silver Ager who saw so many storylines solved without graphic death...but then I'm not sure that will ever mean anything anymore...