Moonstone Forums

No, but the cover is the first thing that the kids see and therefore it sends an instant signal, like any cover does/should.

As I understand it, and judging from some of Mr. Bullock's comments, the cover is representative of the content in this case.

Pip

Hi Pippi,
Not knowing how old your children are, I can't really say whether or not the interior story & art would be inappropriate for them (which is ultimately your decision anyway, and a hearty congrats for taking such an active role in your kids' lives!).

It is one of the more violent stories so far, but still has nothing in it that surpasses violence I've seen in Mr. Falk's stories. With today's art styles, the violence might be a bit more graphic and in-your-face than it was all those years ago, however, I think in the 1930s, showing someone getting shot was considered pretty graphic...

In comparison, Marvel & DC have had far more graphic depictions on covers and inside their books over the last 20 years. I've yet to encounter a US comic fan who saw this cover and didn't think it was compelling, but here in the US, depictions of violence are commonplace, with movies, TV shows and video games that make this cover look G-rated.

One thing I always wonder at, however, is why some people don't mind punching, kicking, explosions, and other acts of violence, but draw the line when someone is stabbed, shot or otherwise bloodied. When I was growing up, I found myself in more street fights than I can remember. Never once did one end without someone at least getting a bloody nose. Pain is always the end result of violence, so I don't understand how someone could balk at seeing a little bit of bloody spit coming from someone's mouth, yet think it's perfectly all right to see someone get pummeled with a baseball bat in the first place. (Not to say this is how you, personally, view the world, but more a generalized opinion I've garnered from watching some people complain abut violent depictions in games, movies, TV shows and comics.)

Exactly, Moonstone is yet to have the Phantom drowns someone. Erk!

Hi Mike/Dougy

Compared to all the other ghastly things that happen around us daily, it is perhaps futile to react to a bloody cover. But do we really have to follow suit?

Mike, you explain 'a little bit of bloody spit coming from someone's mouth' with 'Pain is always the end result of violence', and that is obviously true in a logical sense, but has not comics always been very good at explaining violence without having to rely on its most basic visualisation?

There should regularly be bloody spit coming out of the mouths of most comic characters (including Donald Duck, no actually he should have been dead a hundred times over), but this is never, or rarely, shown 'on screen', and for a reason, except in those cases where the intended target group is literally thirsting for graphic violence. This is fair enough, but my question to you in that case is: Is Moonstone knowingly repositioning themselves by moving towards this particular target audience?

Pip

Then, I guess US fans are 'thirsting', because I see it all the time. Not that it makes it right, but it just means it is what it is. I'm sure there was a time where seeing cleavage in comics was unacceptable, now it's the norm...

Warning: Don't click these links if Phantom #15's cover offends you.
http://pnmedia.gamespy.com/planetxmen.ga...ne-041.jpg

http://comicsmedia.ign.com/comics/image/...401614.jpg

http://www.newsarama.com/marvelnew/Sept0..._blood.jpg

http://www.silverbulletcomicbooks.com/ne...over02.jpg

http://www.avatarpress.com/Avehaley.jpg

http://www.supermanhomepage.com/images/c...man75a.jpg

As you can see, for books on the shelf here in the US, #15 is tame.

Since I'm not Moonstone, (I'm just one of their freelancers) I can't answer that for them. I can make the observation that with books such as Vampire the Masquerade, Werewolf: The Apocalypse, Succubus etc that being G rated was never in the cards.

However, you can rest assured that having a few drops of bloody spit on a cover are not going to be the norm with any Phantom stories I write. This particular issue called for it, so, as such, it got it. Seems just a few weeks ago someone was saying the artistic integrity of the stories was being compromised by the market, now we do a cover that is based solely on artistic needs (and it was completed before the aforementioned comment) and people question that. Just more proof that you can never please everyone.

I'd also like to do the shameless plug thing here and say if you want something that's strictly all-ages friendly, check out
Lions, Tigers and Bears.

While the Phantom may not be torn from the pages of Infinite Crisis when it comes to adult content, I also don't think he's ever been suitable for all-ages.

I agree Mike, I've never thought of the Phantom as all-ages, and yes, LTB rocks!

On another note, King Features has to approve all covers before they are printed, so obviosuly this cover was OK with them. Therefor they agree that The Phantom is a mature title. I remember when The Matirx first came out it was argued the film should have recived an R 18+ rating here in Australia because of the "fetus feilds" shot, but yet no one complained about the actualy close up of the baby with all the tudes sticking out of it. So, violence is subjective, some people can take more, some less.

So what I'm saying is while Pipi might find this not cool, others won't mind it. But then, as I've said, it takes alot to phase me. the covers Mike linked to are fine for me, but they are all mature age books.

That I disagree with. What about the Wilson McCoy era? Most of these stories (the odd exception, such as The Phantom Goes To War, occurs) can be read by anybody, from three to hundred year olds. Also, I would say that most, if not all, Sy Barry stories could be read by a child. I read all kinds of Phantom stories (and watched a lot of violent movies, but that's another story) when I was a kid, and I haven't turned into a psychopathic killer yet.

I regularly read extremely violent comic books, like Sin City. I have watched everything from Peter Jackson's Braindead to any Schwarzenegger movie since I was a kid. Just because I didn't like this cover, doesn't mean I can't take violence.And no, I don't really care about violence INSIDE my Phantom stories, I just don't think it needs to be "thrown in the face" when you look at the cover.

When that is said, I have never seen a cover spawn so much discussion before. Every PR is good PR, y'know. :mrgreen:

Sin City is nothing. There are alot more violent comics. Violence isn't just blood though, it can also be themes. An issue of Sandman is all about a serial killer's convention - brilliant read BTW!

Let me clarify that. It isn't my personal opinion of what is "all-ages", it's what I've come to recognize as all-ages appropriate after talking to countless parents, teachers and librarians about comic books.

Sex, violence and themes that involve politics, crime and corruption are considered off-limits by the "all-ages" set. The Phantom has always had an element of violence, as well as themes and stories that might be too much for the average pre-shooler to properly process without good parental guidance. Luckily, there are still parents such as Pippi out there who take an active interest in their kids' lives, however, this type of parent is becoming the exception, not the rule.

Don't get me wrong, I grew up on a diet of violent cartoons, violent pro sports (football, hockey, wrestling), violent movies, TV shows and comics and to date have yet to be accused or convicted of a violent crime.

However, in today's "everything myst be politically correct" world, a guy who runs around leaving a skull mark imprinted on people he delivers knock-out punches too is no longer considered all-ages appropriate by the masses.

We seem to be discussing violence in general now, not my decision to refuse to put a comic with this cover straight into my children's hands. I know nothing of what's inside the covers yet. I am just saying that, saldy, it will not be lying around for general viewing in the Pippi household.

I clicked on every violent link upstream, Mike. Some panels I found tame and some I found gruesome. What was your point? That Phantom No 15 automatically becomes less violent, but only if you look at these drawings first? Or simply that I am and old-fashioned parent that can't cope?

Unless countless other parents, I read many violent comics, even some very realistic ones mentioned upthread. They exist for a reason. Some are really good, some are dreadfully childish. I do not yet know if my children are prepared to follow their comic loving parent into that territory, so I am asking you to respect my decision to hold off a bit when it looks like the Phantom is going the same way, instead of suggesting between the lines that I am a dinosaur.

Pip