Comic Book News

Gryfter

Gryfter

Yeah, WW's bracers are a bit much.... imagine what will happen when she punches someone with them..... won't that be a tad bloody.

I applaud them on making an attempt at a non-skimpy outfit for her but does anyone think it will last? Judging form the last three times they've done this she'll be back in the one piece within a year.
 
Null

Null

The Wonder Woman outfit is almost there, but just not quite right.

Superman... just looks fundamentally wrong. Jeans, T-shirt, and bloody fists? He looks more like a psychotic vigilante who wants to be like Superman, but is really more like Travis Bickle.

Dear DC: Superman shouldn't look like a street thug. You've gotten this badly wrong.
 
Last edited:
SpecialKO

SpecialKO

Null said:
Dear DC: Superman shouldn't look like a street thug. You've gotten this badly wrong.
Click to expand...
I can only assume this is part of their long-term plot to re-convince us that the Man of Steel version of the character was actually a decent depiction of Superman.
 
Bowielee

Bowielee

I love the new Batgirl design. I wish it were on someone other than Barbara Gordon, though :p
I still hate that DC got rid of one of the most prominent disabled heroes this side of Daredevil.
 
Celt Z

Celt Z

Being familiar with both their work, neither of their opinions surprise me (though I am disappointed with Campbell, having enjoyed his work since the early 90's.) Boohoo that "sexy" isn't a priority for women characters, tiniest violin for them. I like that a lot of the redesigns are focused more on looking cool and believable (-ish) rather than "fappable". Not everything is perfect (not loving Wonder Woman's weird pointy gauntlets, for example), but it's a million times better than the "high heels and bathing suits" these guys (and a number of others) have been passing off as "uniforms" for the past 25+ years. And yes, while there has been sexist costumes from the dawning of comics, it feels like it started to reach a fever pitch coming out of the 80's and into the 90's.
 
ThatNickGuy

ThatNickGuy

I actually like this movement in comics towards making females less sexualized or just for the male gaze. The great thing is they can still be sexy without being sexualized (there's a big difference).

My favourite example? I've mentioned it before: Cameron Stewart's redesign of Catwoman, which has been her outfit ever since its debut:


It's sleek, sexy, but practical. Especially for a gymnast/tumbler character like Catwoman.

But ever since Stewart and Rick Burchett stopped drawing her, there's been more empahsis on drawing her with the zipper pulled down nearly to her naval.

Sexy? Sure. But it's needless, impractical, and is only done to sexualize her.
 
Null

Null

Erik Larsen can shut the fuck up.

Here's the thing. There's nothing wrong with sexy. Sexy is great. But a female heroine shouldn't *just* be eye candy. She should look badass, not ridiculous. Let's take different versions of the same character: Gamora the assassin, from Guardians of the Galaxy. In her earlier versions, she's wearing effectively nothing: a belt of metal spangles and a mesh body stocking.
Sexy, but kind of ridiculous, not at all badass.

Later versions did away with the body stocking and instead had her in some strategically placed ribbons. Again, sexy, but ridiculous.

Then you've got the "stormtrooper" armored version (I think J Scott Campbell did that one) from more recent years - still a hot green skinned space babe, but one that looks like she can kick ass and take names with the best of them.

And then you have the MCU version - bracers, sleeveless semi-mesh shirt, and trousers.
Simple, functional, looked fantastic on Zoe Saldana, and she had some of the best fight scenes in the movie. So you can have sexy without being ridiculous.

The "vocal minority" argument is severely undercut by some simple facts: the MCU costumes are, by and large, far more practical than their comic book counterparts, for obvious reasons, and the Marvel movies have made seriously all of the fucking money. The Winter Soldier made $700,000,000 worldwide. Guardians of the Galaxy made almost $800,000,000. So in one summer, Marvel Cinematic Universe made almost 1.5 BILLION dollars. That's way more than they've made selling comics for probably the last decade. When you have more people seeing the movies than reading the comics, and the movies viewers liking the more practical costumes, that's a pretty strong argument.

(copypasta'd from discussing it on FB with David Faught et al)
 
Last edited:
figmentPez

figmentPez

Staff member
PatrThom said:
I have to say I'm in with the crowd of people who think the Wonder Wolverina outfit is a bit much.
Click to expand...
It just dawned on me, they're not Wolverine, those spikes are Azrael:
Azrael_Jean-Paul_Valley_0025.jpg

And they looked just as stupid when he was using them.
 
Last edited:
Celt Z

Celt Z

I've seen a lot of back-and-forth on it, but I can't blame people. The current Batgirl is aimed at a younger and female audience. The Nu52 (ugh) has negated the events of The Killing Joke, which wasn't about Batgirl in the first place (she was targeted, sexually assaulted and eventually paralyzed because she was a plot device Com. Gordon's daughter). Whether it was in poor taste or not, the reference has nothing to do with the current run and probably wasn't a good choice for a cover.
 
ThatNickGuy

ThatNickGuy

One key argument, as Celt referred to - and one that I agree with - is that tonally, the cover does not suit the current run of the book. The current run is more light-hearted and fun, aiming at a younger audience. Not kids, specifically, but at the very least, a younger audience than adults.

The Killing Joke, on the other hand - which this cover represents - is a very adult story.

As Kurt Busiek has discussed at length on Twitter, a cover should always - even these variant covers - represent the content you'll find when you open to the first page. If this cover was used for an anniversary edition of The Killing Joke, then it would've made more sense. But not for the more light-hearted book in the current run of Batgirl.

Keep in mind that the cover was cancelled at the request of the artist himself.

Also, would the people that posted pictures please put them behind spoiler cuts? Not because it's spoiler content, but because they're giant images and it's a pain to scroll through them to read back through comments. That's why I put mine behind spoiler cuts.
 
chris

chris

Celt Z said:
I've seen a lot of back-and-forth on it, but I can't blame people. The current Batgirl is aimed at a younger and female audience. The Nu52 (ugh) has negated the events of The Killing Joke, which wasn't about Batgirl in the first place (she was targeted, sexually assaulted and eventually paralyzed because she was a plot device Com. Gordon's daughter). Whether it was in poor taste or not, the reference has nothing to do with the current run and probably wasn't a good choice for a cover.
Click to expand...
That's the confusing thing. Everything got a reset except the Batman lore. In Scott Snyders "Death of the Family" we see Gordon talks about old wounds with holding pictures of Barbara in a hospital bed and Joker arrested at a carnival/fair. Batman mention Batman Incorporated, Damien and Joker recalls that he killed Jason Todd once.
 
GasBandit

GasBandit

Staff member
@MindDetective

A hugbox is an "echo chamber" where a discussion brooks no opposing viewpoints for the sake of "making sure everyone feels comfortable and secure."

The image chain in the link shows users in a twitter conversation thread bemoaning that "Batman is never shown like this [powerless/helpless like the controversial batgirl cover]" and challenging anyone to "Show me the cover. Show me the instance where Batman is fully the victim of the Joker on a cover where he is stripped of all agency."

Comic fans then take turns sending the innumerable covers that show exactly that - Batman chained up, tied up, tortured, etc (and for good measure, also included the scenes of the Joker beating Robin to death with a crowbar and the famous "ghost Robin accusing Batman" cover)... and subsequently being blocked on twitter by those who issued the snide challenge instead of admitting they were wrong and have no idea what they're talking about. Because the HUGBOX MUST BE PRESERVED.
 
MindDetective

MindDetective

GasBandit said:
@MindDetective

A hugbox is an "echo chamber" where a discussion brooks no opposing viewpoints for the sake of "making sure everyone feels comfortable and secure."

The image chain in the link shows users in a twitter conversation thread bemoaning that "Batman is never shown like this [powerless/helpless like the controversial batgirl cover]" and challenging anyone to "Show me the cover. Show me the instance where Batman is fully the victim of the Joker on a cover where he is stripped of all agency."

Comic fans then take turns sending the innumerable covers that show exactly that - Batman chained up, tied up, tortured, etc (and for good measure, also included the scenes of the Joker beating Robin to death with a crowbar and the famous "ghost Robin accusing Batman" cover)... and subsequently being blocked on twitter by those who issued the snide challenge instead of admitting they were wrong and have no idea what they're talking about. Because the HUGBOX MUST BE PRESERVED.
Click to expand...
Thanks. I've never heard that term before, although I could tell what was going on I the images just fine. In psychology we refer to motivated reasoning and cognitive dissonance to discuss such things.
 
Bowielee

Bowielee

MindDetective said:
Thanks. I've never heard that term before, although I could tell what was going on I the images just fine. In psychology we refer to motivated reasoning and cognitive dissonance to discuss such things.
Click to expand...
I think that cognitive dissonance is one of the psychology terms that people throw around without really understanding what it means... particularly when they're experiencing it in regards to their own behavior ;)
 
figmentPez

figmentPez

Staff member
GasBandit said:
@MindDetective

A hugbox is an "echo chamber" where a discussion brooks no opposing viewpoints for the sake of "making sure everyone feels comfortable and secure."
Click to expand...
And, since there are several comments about it on the Imgur, "Galbrush Threepwood" is a reference to the difficulty of putting female characters into a space dominated by male characters. Guybrush Threepwood is a subversion of competent male heroes. Monkey Island's humor often revolves around the fact that Guybrush succeeds despite being an incompetent idiot. You couldn't do the same story/jokes with a female protagonist, because a woman failing at being a hero, and needing to be rescued, or succeed by luck, was/is the established adventure trope. That's the problem Batgirl runs into. Batman tied up and helpless is a subversion of the usual state of a comic book hero. Batgirl tied up and helpless... is less clear. Has Batgirl been established as a competent heroine, enough that being tied up is counter to expectations? Or is she still burdened with the history of the genre, such that people still expect a female character to be helpless and in imminent danger? It depends on who you ask, and the details of the image, and who the image was made for, and a hundred other little details.
 
PatrThom

PatrThom

I like how Ray has completely obscured the features below the "S."
They are not necessary and would only create distraction, therefore they have been removed.
Also, good job on the facial expression.

--Patrick
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top