JLA Wedding Special #1 - See More Butts
badth...@yahoo.com
as when someone mentions a wedding, I immediately think of Wonder
Woman's ass:
http://images.newsarama.com/dcnew/Sept07/3_covs/JLA_WedSp_cover_solicits.jpg
And am I wrong in interpreting that it's Black Canary's Bachelorette
Party and Superman is coming out of the cake? If so, the artwork is
worse than I thought, because I only came to that conclusion because
a) he's the only guy there and b) he's above the cake. I'm really not
getting the sense he's coming *out* of that cake. Obviously Ed Benes
was too preoccupied with the whole ass thing. He never stops giving
me reason to hate him.
Sorry but there was a time when event the great Neal Adams would have
his covers rejected. How this slipped through is another sign of
declining editorial standards at DC. Amanda Conner should have done
this too, because even though she's part of the cheesecake brigade at
least she gets the sense of fun that's suppose to be in the reversing
gender roles going on:
http://images.newsarama.com/dcnew/Sept07/3_covs/GABC_WS_solicit.jpg
Tom
> The solicitation for the JLA Wedding Special #1reveals I'm not alone,
> as when someone mentions a wedding, I immediately think of Wonder
> Woman's ass:
>
>
> And am I wrong in interpreting that it's Black Canary's Bachelorette
> Party and Superman is coming out of the cake? If so, the artwork is
> worse than I thought, because I only came to that conclusion because
> a) he's the only guy there and b) he's above the cake. I'm really not
> getting the sense he's coming *out* of that cake. Obviously Ed Benes
> was too preoccupied with the whole ass thing. He never stops giving
> me reason to hate him.
>
> Sorry but there was a time when event the great Neal Adams would have
> his covers rejected. How this slipped through is another sign of
> declining editorial standards at DC. Amanda Conner should have done
> this too, because even though she's part of the cheesecake brigade at
> least she gets the sense of fun that's suppose to be in the reversing
> gender roles going on:
>
> http://images.newsarama.com/dcnew/Sept07/3_covs/GABC_WS_solicit.jpg
You're spot on, badthingus. Look around the top of the cake and near
Superman's legs. You'll notice chuncks of cake falling away.
I agree with you about Amanda Conner. She get it. Benes doesn't.
Perhaps it's the gender gap at work in comics! ;-)
Tom
Fallen
>The solicitation for the JLA Wedding Special #1reveals I'm not alone,
>as when someone mentions a wedding, I immediately think of Wonder
>Woman's ass:
>
>http://images.newsarama.com/dcnew/Sept07/3_covs/JLA_WedSp_cover_solicits.jpg
>
>And am I wrong in interpreting that it's Black Canary's Bachelorette
>Party and Superman is coming out of the cake? If so, the artwork is
>worse than I thought, because I only came to that conclusion because
>a) he's the only guy there and b) he's above the cake. I'm really not
>getting the sense he's coming *out* of that cake. Obviously Ed Benes
>was too preoccupied with the whole ass thing. He never stops giving
>me reason to hate him.
>
>
You also have to wonder why Superman is in full costume? Don't they see
him like that every single day, unless he follows it up with a
striptease shouldn't he be in less clothing?
I think that's Lois conveniently behind Wonder Woman's ass too. Maybe
that's why he's in full costume :)
Fallen.
Tom
> badthin...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >The solicitation for the JLA Wedding Special #1reveals I'm not alone,
> >as when someone mentions a wedding, I immediately think of Wonder
> >Woman's ass:
>
>
> >And am I wrong in interpreting that it's Black Canary's Bachelorette
> >Party and Superman is coming out of the cake? If so, the artwork is
> >worse than I thought, because I only came to that conclusion because
> >a) he's the only guy there and b) he's above the cake. I'm really not
> >getting the sense he's coming *out* of that cake. Obviously Ed Benes
> >was too preoccupied with the whole ass thing. He never stops giving
> >me reason to hate him.
>
> You also have to wonder why Superman is in full costume? Don't they see
> him like that every single day, unless he follows it up with a
> striptease shouldn't he be in less clothing?
>
> I think that's Lois conveniently behind Wonder Woman's ass too. Maybe
> that's why he's in full costume :)
>
> Fallen.
I'm sure Lois is there keeping an eye on her man! One or two well
chosen and backward words from Zatanna and those women could do
whatever they want to Superman. ;-)
Tom
badth...@yahoo.com
It's so poorly done. Superman should be coming out of the cake in the
foreground with the women in background (which means you couldn't see
their asses which is why Benes couldn't do it). He should be only be
in his red cape and shorts and very embarassed by it, while they are
delighted, including Lois who's holding his blue tights.
YKW '06
to communicate as follows:
Apparently, neither B'wana Beast nor Mike Grell Cosmic Boy was available
that night...
--
------------------- ------------------------------------------------
|| E-mail: ykw2006 ||"The mystery of government is not how Washington||
|| -at-gmail-dot-com ||works but how to make it stop." -- P.J. O'Rourke||
|| ----------- || ------------------------------------ ||
||Replace "-at-" with|| Keeping Usenet Trouble-Free ||
|| "@" to respond. || Since 1998 ||
------------------- ------------------------------------------------
Tim Turnip
come on badthingus! You've been harping on Benes so much that I'm
finally going to challenge. I disclose that I find myself
consistently appalled by the aesthetic atrocities committed by Michael
Turner and would have issues with a number of other contemporary
artists (including the otherwise-very-nice-i'm-sure young Japanese
lady who drew the Heroes For Hire about to get tentacle-raped on their
cover), but I gotta say... I don't understand all the Benes-hate. I
think his grasp of anatomy is just fine especially compared to the
Turners of the world. He does add a bit more detail than I'm used to,
which you can definitely tell in the female-posterior area. But I
personally don't notice Benes' asses until you point them out.
On the other hand, speaking of pointing things out, it should be
pretty obvious that Superman is flying out of that cake, there are big
chunks of cake flying into the air along with him. And you yourself
figured it out -- it might not have leapt out at you, but to more
greatly emphasize him triumphantly charging out of a cake would be to
de-emphasize what is really supposed to be a group shot of DC's
premiere heroines with Supes as an ancillary figure.
Mike Blake
> <http://images.newsarama.com/dcnew/Sept07/3_covs/JLA_WedSp_cover_solicits.jpg>
>
>
>
> And am I wrong in interpreting that it's Black Canary's
> Bachelorette Party and Superman is coming out of the cake? If
> so, the artwork is worse than I thought, because I only came to
> that conclusion because a) he's the only guy there and b) he's
> above the cake. I'm really not getting the sense he's coming
> *out* of that cake.
I thought the same thing, because there are very tiny pieces of
what look like cake falling from him. But it makes no sense that
none of it sticks to his costume. Or for that matter why a guy
popping out of a cake is wearing a full costume....
Lilith
A few backwards words from Zatanna and those women could do whatever
they want to Lois.
>Tom
--
Lilith
Tom
badth...@yahoo.com
> On Tue, 19 Jun 2007 09:17:35 -0700, badthin...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >The solicitation for the JLA Wedding Special #1reveals I'm not alone,
> >as when someone mentions a wedding, I immediately think of Wonder
> >Woman's ass:
>
Wonder Woman's ass and considering it's a bacherlorette party, it
couldn' t be a better example of an artist getting it wrong and
putting his own predilicitons in front of the purpose of the design.
> On the other hand, speaking of pointing things out, it should be
> pretty obvious that Superman is flying out of that cake, there are big
> chunks of cake flying into the air along with him. And you yourself
> figured it out -- it might not have leapt out at you, but to more
> greatly emphasize him triumphantly charging out of a cake would be to
> de-emphasize what is really supposed to be a group shot of DC's
> premiere heroines with Supes as an ancillary figure.
But I shouldn't have to *figure it out.* Maybe if Diana's and Dinah's
asses weren't bigger than the cake, I wouldn't have had to. He blew
it pure and simple. He turned what should have been a humorous
turnaround in sexploitation into his typical sexploitative cover.
Superman is supposed to be the sex object here, but you'd never know
it.
Gustav...@yahoo.com
> On Jun 19, 6:12 pm, Tim Turnip <timtur...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > cover), but I gotta say... I don't understand all the Benes-hate. I
> > think his grasp of anatomy is just fine especially compared to the
> > Turners of the world. He does add a bit more detail than I'm used to,
> > which you can definitely tell in the female-posterior area. But I
> > personally don't notice Benes' asses until you point them out.
Benes is better than Turner. That's not setting a very high bar,
however.
> Don't notice!?! There is nothing more prominent on that cover than
> Wonder Woman's ass and considering it's a bacherlorette party, it
> couldn' t be a better example of an artist getting it wrong and
> putting his own predilicitons in front of the purpose of the design.
There were lots of ways that this scene could have been done to not
only show lots of ass shots, but also show that Superman was actually
coming out of the cake. It's just a stunningly stiff drawing.
Plus, why isn't that Nightwing? I thought he was supposed to be the
hottest boy in the DC Universe.
And, it is a bachelorette party being drawn for the amusement of men,
so where is the pillow fight?
Huntress is wearing her old, less revealing outfit. What happened?
> > On the other hand, speaking of pointing things out, it should be
> > pretty obvious that Superman is flying out of that cake, there are big
> > chunks of cake flying into the air along with him. And you yourself
> > figured it out -- it might not have leapt out at you, but to more
> > greatly emphasize him triumphantly charging out of a cake would be to
> > de-emphasize what is really supposed to be a group shot of DC's
> > premiere heroines with Supes as an ancillary figure.
>
> But I shouldn't have to *figure it out.* Maybe if Diana's and Dinah's
> asses weren't bigger than the cake, I wouldn't have had to. He blew
> it pure and simple. He turned what should have been a humorous
> turnaround in sexploitation into his typical sexploitative cover.
> Superman is supposed to be the sex object here, but you'd never know
> it.
It should have been Nightwing giving Black Canary a lapdance while
Babs looks on disapprovingly. And the rest of the women having a
pillow fight in the background wearing lingerie (which would amusingly
be less revealing than most of their costumes)
--Gustavo (and maybe Nightwing should be wearing Robin style short
shorts...)
Gustav...@yahoo.com
cake. He carefuly waited until no one was looking... He has X-Ray
vision, you know he could tell if people were looking at him.
Awful, awful cover.
And why is Wonder Woman more prominant than the bride?
Fallen
>On Jun 19, 9:19 pm, badthin...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>
>>On Jun 19, 6:12 pm, Tim Turnip <timtur...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>cover), but I gotta say... I don't understand all the Benes-hate. I
>>>think his grasp of anatomy is just fine especially compared to the
>>>Turners of the world. He does add a bit more detail than I'm used to,
>>>which you can definitely tell in the female-posterior area. But I
>>>personally don't notice Benes' asses until you point them out.
>>>
>>>
>
>Benes is better than Turner. That's not setting a very high bar,
>however.
>
>
>
>>Don't notice!?! There is nothing more prominent on that cover than
>>Wonder Woman's ass and considering it's a bacherlorette party, it
>>couldn' t be a better example of an artist getting it wrong and
>>putting his own predilicitons in front of the purpose of the design.
>>
>>
>
>There were lots of ways that this scene could have been done to not
>only show lots of ass shots, but also show that Superman was actually
>coming out of the cake. It's just a stunningly stiff drawing.
>
>Plus, why isn't that Nightwing? I thought he was supposed to be the
>hottest boy in the DC Universe.
>
It should be Batman. That's who most of them really fantasise about and
we all know it :)
Fallen.
Magnus, Robot Fighter.
Agreed...it looks like Superman's coming out allright...but not out of
the cake.
And can someone explain why all these liberated women are celebrating
so heartily over Dinah getting married to Oliver "Can't Keep it in My
Pants" Queen?
Eminence
This kind of gig seems tailor-made for Vartox, doesn't it?
Eminence
_______________
Usenet: Global Village of the Damned
Glenn Simpson
>
> - Show quoted text -
Because they trust Dinah to make her own decisions?
Christian Smith
<glen...@comcast.net> wrote
That and the fact that they all know that she could beat the living
crap out of him any time he steps out of line
Christian
(interested that Mia is missing from the JLA cover unless thats her
behind Vixen)
--
"We're adults? When did that happen? And how do we make it stop?"
Meredith Grey
adam...@sbcglobal.net
> The solicitation for the JLA Wedding Special #1reveals I'm not alone,
> as when someone mentions a wedding, I immediately think of Wonder
> Woman's ass:
>
>
> And am I wrong in interpreting that it's Black Canary's Bachelorette
> Party and Superman is coming out of the cake? If so, the artwork is
> worse than I thought, because I only came to that conclusion because
> a) he's the only guy there and b) he's above the cake. I'm really not
> getting the sense he's coming *out* of that cake. Obviously Ed Benes
> was too preoccupied with the whole ass thing. He never stops giving
> me reason to hate him.
>
> Sorry but there was a time when event the great Neal Adams would have
> his covers rejected. How this slipped through is another sign of
> declining editorial standards at DC. Amanda Conner should have done
> this too, because even though she's part of the cheesecake brigade at
> least she gets the sense of fun that's suppose to be in the reversing
> gender roles going on:
>
> http://images.newsarama.com/dcnew/Sept07/3_covs/GABC_WS_solicit.jpg
I never have a problem seeing the lovely women of the DC Universe.
That being said, if anyone's ass should've been a focal point on the
cover it should've been Black Canary's. It's her party after all.
Superman is the WORST idea to pop out of a cake. Besides wouldn't it
creep Kara out too much since he is a younger version of her cousin.
Although the old Silver Age Earth-1 stories between Supes and his
cousin were a little risque. Normally, I'd say Nightwing but, with
Babs there it'd be too weird so, go with man-whore #2, Arsenal/Red
Arrow. He'd have no problem with the role.
I like Benes' art mostly, I don't have a problem with it. Turner,
Liefield, those guys I have problems with. I'm a guy. If Benes wants
to show off Diana's assets (grin) I'm all for it. But, I do agree with
you as for the cover arrangement and his choice of characters. It also
looks like Superman is one of the girls more than the party favor.
The cover by Amanda Conner is spot-on perfect for Green Arrow and
Black Canary and it shows her butt. lol
For a bachelorette cover, they should've had all of the women
wearing "civvies' with Arsenal table dancing. Him or Ambush Bug
depending on how funny you want it to look.
Tim Turnip
>foreground with the women in background...
Superman should be in the foreground of the Wedding Special? That
just seems wrong. It's the women who are having the party, Superman
is just the entertainment!
Tim Turnip
favorite artist, the Wedding Special cover is not a great cover, and I
thought his work in the new JLA #10 was fairly stiff and Image-y.
However:
-- confusion about Superman coming out of the cake: hello! he's
obviously flying, he's vertically positioned above the cake, and there
are chunks of cake falling off. Is his situation the first thing you
notice about the cover? -- no, it's not supposed to be.
-- why is it Superman and not Nightwing? Because Superman is the
iconic male hero in the DCU. If it were Nightwing, you'd have a whole
lot more NON-hardcore readers going, 'Huh? why is Nightwing coming
out of the cake?' (if not 'Who is that?')
-- why is no one in civvies? Because then we wouldn't be able to
definitively recognize who they were.
-- isn't this icky especially with it being Superman? No, because
it's just a symbolic cover -- these ladies really would be dressing in
civvies and using a cake with someone else if they had a real
bachelorette party. This is just good clean semi-'real' fun --
everyone has their clothes on.
-- Why is Wonder Woman more prominent than the bride? -- I actually
agree with this question and ask it myself. It's Dinah's day.
Jim Connick
<adam...@sbcglobal.net> wrote
> Normally, I'd say Nightwing but, with
> Babs there it'd be too weird so, go with man-whore #2, Arsenal/Red
> Arrow. He'd have no problem with the role.
Can't agree there, Dinah is pretty much a mommy to Roy, isn't she?
Especially if marrying Ollie.
John
"Eminence" <grey.e...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:1fmi73dcbjc4tdrbi...@4ax.com...
"I have come... to clean... your pool" *wiggle moustache*
Duggy
> The solicitation for the JLA Wedding Special #1reveals I'm not alone,
> as when someone mentions a wedding, I immediately think of Wonder
> Woman's ass:
>
>
> And am I wrong in interpreting that it's Black Canary's Bachelorette
> Party and Superman is coming out of the cake?
I think it's Wonder Woman's Wedding. We had hint in #0 and the recent
JSA. I'm not sure why it has to be Black Canary's just because she's
getting married, too.
> Amanda Conner should have done
> this too, because even though she's part of the cheesecake brigade at
> least she gets the sense of fun that's suppose to be in the reversing
> gender roles going on:
> http://images.newsarama.com/dcnew/Sept07/3_covs/GABC_WS_solicit.jpg
Reversing the gender roles? Which one in in their underwear?
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
<GustavoWom...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Plus, why isn't that Nightwing? I thought he was supposed to be the
> hottest boy in the DC Universe.
Only when Devin writes him.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
> badthin...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > <http://images.newsarama.com/dcnew/Sept07/3_covs/JLA_WedSp_cover_solic...>
> I thought the same thing, because there are very tiny pieces of
> what look like cake falling from him. But it makes no sense that
> none of it sticks to his costume.
His invulnerable aura protects it.
He still has the invulnerable aura, right?
===
= DUG.
===
YKW '06
communicate as follows:
> Normally, I'd say Nightwing but, with
> Babs there it'd be too weird so, go with man-whore #2, Arsenal/Red
> Arrow. He'd have no problem with the role.
At a bachelorette party for the woman who's the closest thing he's ever had
to a mother figure?
Talk about weird....
badth...@yahoo.com
brigade"
grinningdemon
I think Canary herself pretty much proved that point in Birds of Prey
a while back when she laid one on him and everyone was asking what it
was like.
badth...@yahoo.com
> I don't want to give Benes too much slack because he's far from my
> favorite artist, the Wedding Special cover is not a great cover, and I
> thought his work in the new JLA #10 was fairly stiff and Image-y.
> However:
>
> -- confusion about Superman coming out of the cake: hello! he's
> obviously flying, he's vertically positioned above the cake, and there
> are chunks of cake falling off. Is his situation the first thing you
> notice about the cover? -- no, it's not supposed to be.
>
weddings if not the only wedding object present? Because right now
it's WW's ass and she's not even the bride.
> -- why is it Superman and not Nightwing? Because Superman is the
> iconic male hero in the DCU. If it were Nightwing, you'd have a whole
> lot more NON-hardcore readers going, 'Huh? why is Nightwing coming
> out of the cake?' (if not 'Who is that?')
>
You're right on that. The only other choice is Batman and even as a
joke it's simply too out of character for him.
> -- why is no one in civvies? Because then we wouldn't be able to
> definitively recognize who they were.
>
Again, a no brainer.
> -- isn't this icky especially with it being Superman? No, because
> it's just a symbolic cover -- these ladies really would be dressing in
> civvies and using a cake with someone else if they had a real
> bachelorette party. This is just good clean semi-'real' fun --
> everyone has their clothes on.
>
Again, what's wrong is Superman's joy at doing it. It should seem to
be a coerced embarassment. Clark Kent from Kansas simply does not
jump out of cakes willingly or delightedly. Again, see Conner's
cover. Green Arrow has a goofy look on his face at the role reversal.
> -- Why is Wonder Woman more prominent than the bride? -- I actually
> agree with this question and ask it myself. It's Dinah's day.
Sadly this comes back to the Superman answer: she's the only icon on
that cover. Well, Lois Lane is too, but you really don't know her
unless she's standing next to Superman and has a "press" badge on.
badth...@yahoo.com
there's the justifiably reviled "Dick Grayson: Male Model" storyline
from Bruce Jones. Punch it away, Superboy! Punch it away!
Peter Bruells
Ah, but taking it out of his pants isn't gher decision, it's his.
Glenn Simpson
But it's her decision to believe that he's changed. Heck, in the
issues I've seen, he hasn't even tried to convince her of that, she
has determined it of her own volition.
Ironically enough considering who we're talking about, it's nobody
else's job to save her from herself. To do so is to show a lack of
respect for her ability to decide what's right for herself. She got
rid of him when it was time to do so, and she can decide when it's
time to take him back.
Tim Turnip
>On Jun 20, 7:53 pm, Tim Turnip <timtur...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I don't want to give Benes too much slack because he's far from my
>> favorite artist, the Wedding Special cover is not a great cover, and I
>> thought his work in the new JLA #10 was fairly stiff and Image-y.
>> However:
>>
>> -- confusion about Superman coming out of the cake: hello! he's
>> obviously flying, he's vertically positioned above the cake, and there
>> are chunks of cake falling off. Is his situation the first thing you
>> notice about the cover? -- no, it's not supposed to be.
>>
>And what should be the first thing you notice on a cover about
>weddings if not the only wedding object present? Because right now
>it's WW's ass and she's not even the bride.
You should first notice the fact that it's a group of assembled
super-women and that the cover title implies bachelorette party. Then
maybe you glance around at some of the faces (or asses) to see who's
present. THEN you notice Superman and the cake. There's a good
reason he's in the background -- he is serving a supporting role, it
is not his party.
>> -- isn't this icky especially with it being Superman? No, because
>> it's just a symbolic cover -- these ladies really would be dressing in
>> civvies and using a cake with someone else if they had a real
>> bachelorette party. This is just good clean semi-'real' fun --
>> everyone has their clothes on.
>>
>Again, what's wrong is Superman's joy at doing it. It should seem to
>be a coerced embarassment.
I disagree. Superman is a grown man with a healthy self-attitude,
he's not so prudish that a symbolic version of him would object to
being on this cover. He is rightly joyous because Dinah is his good
friend too and he's an honorary attendee here, doing his part to help
celebrate her happy occasion.
>Clark Kent from Kansas simply does not
>jump out of cakes willingly or delightedly.
Maybe I'm oldschool, but "Clark Kent from Kansas" still smacks to me
of Byrne-revisionism a little. He used to be a well-adjusted hybrid
of both cultures, and the pre-Crisis Superman knew how to let his hair
down a little. besides, I consider this to fall again under the
safety net of the context being symbolic.
>Again, see Conner's
>cover. Green Arrow has a goofy look on his face at the role reversal.
Yeah, that's because he's being picked up and slung over his fiancee's
shoulder. It's apples and oranges. Graphically, a sheepish-looking
man coming out of a cake wouldn't scan. The widespread reaction would
be, 'what's wrong with him?'
>> -- Why is Wonder Woman more prominent than the bride? -- I actually
>> agree with this question and ask it myself. It's Dinah's day.
>
>Sadly this comes back to the Superman answer: she's the only icon on
>that cover.
To me one of DC's problem's *is* the "Big Three icon" thing (so I was
not happy overmuch with the premise of 52 or that element of it in
Meltzer's JLA). DC finds it hard to launch any of their other
characters in the mass media scene precisely because they have failed
to establish any of them as true icons yet beyond the big three.
Marvel has a raft of more accessable heroes whose mass media storm I
feel has only begun, but DC's relentless promotion of their icons has
ensured that the average moviegoer or TV watcher has relatively little
idea of their other characters, even big guns like the Flash. Hence
this was a truly sadly missed opportunity to help promote *Black
Canary* as an new icon. You'd think they didn't want to help lay the
foundation for a Black Canary movie one day.
badth...@yahoo.com
> On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 20:52:04 -0700, badthin...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >On Jun 20, 7:53 pm, Tim Turnip <timtur...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> I don't want to give Benes too much slack because he's far from my
> >> favorite artist, the Wedding Special cover is not a great cover, and I
> >> thought his work in the new JLA #10 was fairly stiff and Image-y.
> >> However:
>
> >> -- confusion about Superman coming out of the cake: hello! he's
> >> obviously flying, he's vertically positioned above the cake, and there
> >> are chunks of cake falling off. Is his situation the first thing you
> >> notice about the cover? -- no, it's not supposed to be.
>
> >And what should be the first thing you notice on a cover about
> >weddings if not the only wedding object present? Because right now
> >it's WW's ass and she's not even the bride.
>
> You should first notice the fact that it's a group of assembled
> super-women and that the cover title implies bachelorette party. Then
> maybe you glance around at some of the faces (or asses) to see who's
> present. THEN you notice Superman and the cake. There's a good
> reason he's in the background -- he is serving a supporting role, it
> is not his party.
>
Bachelorette Party" I say, "ASS, ASS, ASS!"
> >> -- isn't this icky especially with it being Superman? No, because
> >> it's just a symbolic cover -- these ladies really would be dressing in
> >> civvies and using a cake with someone else if they had a real
> >> bachelorette party. This is just good clean semi-'real' fun --
> >> everyone has their clothes on.
>
> >Again, what's wrong is Superman's joy at doing it. It should seem to
> >be a coerced embarassment.
>
> I disagree. Superman is a grown man with a healthy self-attitude,
> he's not so prudish that a symbolic version of him would object to
> being on this cover. He is rightly joyous because Dinah is his good
> friend too and he's an honorary attendee here, doing his part to help
> celebrate her happy occasion.
>
How is that funny? Role reversal is played for laughs. It's only
funny if he's embarassed.
> >Clark Kent from Kansas simply does not
> >jump out of cakes willingly or delightedly.
>
> Maybe I'm oldschool, but "Clark Kent from Kansas" still smacks to me
> of Byrne-revisionism a little. He used to be a well-adjusted hybrid
> of both cultures, and the pre-Crisis Superman knew how to let his hair
> down a little. besides, I consider this to fall again under the
> safety net of the context being symbolic.
>
Well, of all the things Bryne did, that's the only one that's ever
worked or made sense to me. And I prefer it to someone who sees
himself more as an alien god and less of a man (not that the current
Superman is any less alien god).
> >Again, see Conner's
> >cover. Green Arrow has a goofy look on his face at the role reversal.
>
> Yeah, that's because he's being picked up and slung over his fiancee's
> shoulder. It's apples and oranges. Graphically, a sheepish-looking
> man coming out of a cake wouldn't scan. The widespread reaction would
> be, 'what's wrong with him?'
>
It's in color. The red cheeks (on his face, you dirty people!) would
spell it out. Also, he should have been half-naked and you'd also
have his attempts to cover himself with his hands. But sexualizing
men gives artists like Benes the heebie-jeebies.
> >> -- Why is Wonder Woman more prominent than the bride? -- I actually
> >> agree with this question and ask it myself. It's Dinah's day.
>
> >Sadly this comes back to the Superman answer: she's the only icon on
> >that cover.
>
> To me one of DC's problem's *is* the "Big Three icon" thing (so I was
> not happy overmuch with the premise of 52 or that element of it in
> Meltzer's JLA). DC finds it hard to launch any of their other
> characters in the mass media scene precisely because they have failed
> to establish any of them as true icons yet beyond the big three.
> Marvel has a raft of more accessable heroes whose mass media storm I
> feel has only begun, but DC's relentless promotion of their icons has
> ensured that the average moviegoer or TV watcher has relatively little
> idea of their other characters, even big guns like the Flash. Hence
> this was a truly sadly missed opportunity to help promote *Black
> Canary* as an new icon. You'd think they didn't want to help lay the
> foundation for a Black Canary movie one day.
Yeah, but name one Marvel female icon at all? In 80 years of comics
between the two of them the only one public would recognize would be
Wonder Woman (female versions of male heroes---Supergirl, Batgirl---
don't count)---which is why her ass is the star of Black Canary's party
Glenn Simpson
> It's in color. The red cheeks (on his face, you dirty people!) would
> spell it out. Also, he should have been half-naked and you'd also
> have his attempts to cover himself with his hands. But sexualizing
> men gives artists like Benes the heebie-jeebies.
>
problem thinking of ANY Superman as the type to consider himself a sex
object such that he would think anyone would want to see him pop out
of a cake.
Or to put it another way, I don't think Superman is cool enough to go
along with it, tights or no tights.
Tim Turnip
>On Jun 21, 2:35 pm, Tim Turnip <timtur...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I disagree. Superman is a grown man with a healthy self-attitude,
>> he's not so prudish that a symbolic version of him would object to
>> being on this cover. He is rightly joyous because Dinah is his good
>> friend too and he's an honorary attendee here, doing his part to help
>> celebrate her happy occasion.
>>
>How is that funny? Role reversal is played for laughs. It's only
>funny if he's embarassed.
It's supposed to be light-hearted, not "funny" -- I think you're
reading way too much role reversal into it. Bachelorette parties are
very traditional these days; they were consistently held for the
bride's side of the six weddings I've been to in the last two years
(and were often better-attending and -organized than the bachelor
parties). You never see anyone jumping out of a cake anymore -- for
either side -- but that is a traditional element that plays into the
symbolic nature of the cover.
>> Maybe I'm oldschool, but "Clark Kent from Kansas" still smacks to me
>> of Byrne-revisionism a little. He used to be a well-adjusted hybrid
>> of both cultures, and the pre-Crisis Superman knew how to let his hair
>> down a little. besides, I consider this to fall again under the
>> safety net of the context being symbolic.
>>
>Well, of all the things Bryne did, that's the only one that's ever
>worked or made sense to me. And I prefer it to someone who sees
>himself more as an alien god and less of a man (not that the current
>Superman is any less alien god).
I think they swung it too far the other way -- a lot of post-Crisis
Superman (and feeding into Smallville) was Clark as merely a
super-powered Kansas kid who kept a remote distance from the alien
ancestry he barely knew. The pre-Crisis Superman never thought of him
self as an alien god, I thought his portrayal of a man from both
worlds was always generally well-rounded.
>> Yeah, that's because he's being picked up and slung over his fiancee's
>> shoulder. It's apples and oranges. Graphically, a sheepish-looking
>> man coming out of a cake wouldn't scan. The widespread reaction would
>> be, 'what's wrong with him?'
>>
>It's in color. The red cheeks (on his face, you dirty people!) would
>spell it out. Also, he should have been half-naked and you'd also
>have his attempts to cover himself with his hands. But sexualizing
>men gives artists like Benes the heebie-jeebies.
As indicated before, having him be embarrassed would turn a fun,
casual gathering into a gag cartoon, your penetrating insights into
Benes' very psyche notwithstanding.
>> Marvel has a raft of more accessable heroes whose mass media storm I
>> feel has only begun, but DC's relentless promotion of their icons has
>> ensured that the average moviegoer or TV watcher has relatively little
>> idea of their other characters...
>
>Yeah, but name one Marvel female icon at all? In 80 years of comics
>between the two of them the only one public would recognize would be
>Wonder Woman (female versions of male heroes---Supergirl, Batgirl---
>don't count)---which is why her ass is the star of Black Canary's party
Agreed that Marvel has an abominably deficient roster of solo
super-heroines; as I've posted before, this is why they desperately
need to promote Carol Danvers to A-list status just as she dearly
yearns for in her 'House of M' dreams. Superheroes are 'cooler' now
than they've ever been and both companies are utterly failing to seed
the future with lasting new solo heroes -- it's just that Marvel alone
has both a credibly extensive litany of past male heroes (and hero
groups) and the burning will, apparently, to make Hollywood movies out
of all of them.
badth...@yahoo.com
This is the wrong thread for it, but for me Ms. Marvel suffers from
"Male Clone Disease." She doesn't exist but for a male hero as do
Spiderwoman and She-Hulk. It's time for Jean Grey to come back from
the grave and make Phoenix an A-list female superhero, not one of
Bendis's beloved 70's C-listers.
Edward McArdle
Tim Turnip <timt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I disagree. Superman is a grown man with a healthy self-attitude,
> he's not so prudish that a symbolic version of him would object to
> being on this cover. He is rightly joyous because Dinah is his good
> friend too and he's an honorary attendee here, doing his part to help
> celebrate her happy occasion.
>
And he always has X-ray vision. 8>)
--
my URL,
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~mcardle
Tim Turnip
>This is the wrong thread for it, but for me Ms. Marvel suffers from
>"Male Clone Disease." She doesn't exist but for a male hero as do
>Spiderwoman and She-Hulk.
Nonsense, she may have begun as a Captain Marvel spin-off, but she
quickly became a character in her own right without any attachment to
all that. I doubt she's thought of as a female Mar-Vell anymore. To
some lesser extent, Marvel (and yes Bendis) have done a good job also
distancing She-Hulk and Spider-Woman from their male counterparts and
making them into distinct recognizable characters.
>It's time for Jean Grey to come back from
>the grave and make Phoenix an A-list female superhero, not one of
>Bendis's beloved 70's C-listers.
Phoenix is merely a beloved 70's B-lister, so I don't see much
difference. A-list characters are not born, they are promoted from
the B- and C-lists. If anything, Ms. Marvel carries the company brand
in her name so you'd think they would want to capitalize on that.
Peter Bruells
> This is the wrong thread for it, but for me Ms. Marvel suffers from
> "Male Clone Disease." She doesn't exist but for a male hero as do
> Spiderwoman and She-Hulk. It's time for Jean Grey to come back from
> the grave and make Phoenix an A-list female superhero, not one of
> Bendis's beloved 70's C-listers.
Did i miss a retcon? The last time I looked they just retconned "Jean
Grey gets supersupeerpowers and becomes Galactus light" to "It wasn't
her."
badth...@yahoo.com
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 21:52:29 -0700, badthin...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >This is the wrong thread for it, but for me Ms. Marvel suffers from
> >"Male Clone Disease." She doesn't exist but for a male hero as do
> >Spiderwoman and She-Hulk.
>
> Nonsense, she may have begun as a Captain Marvel spin-off, but she
> quickly became a character in her own right without any attachment to
> all that. I doubt she's thought of as a female Mar-Vell anymore. To
> some lesser extent, Marvel (and yes Bendis) have done a good job also
> distancing She-Hulk and Spider-Woman from their male counterparts and
> making them into distinct recognizable characters.
>
for a female hero.
And neither of them "quickly" became anything. Spiderwoman didn't
truly shine until Claremont took over and he made her into a powerful,
smart superhero (he's always been good with women), but without him
she quickly fell back into the crap heap (and lost a great, great
twist of being Viper's daughter).
Ms. Marvel, aside from suffering from an anachronistic name that
ironically binds her more to Captain Marvel by trying too hard to
protest its emancipation ("Ms"), was never ever able to take flight,
even under Claremont. The best he could do was to abandon the
"Marvel" connection completely and turn her into a totally new
character. But that didn't fly either and she remained C-list even
after her return to Ms. Marvel and the Avengers. At least Spiderwoman
has a totally separate existence from Spider-man. Carol only became
Ms.Marvel because she *wished* she could be fighting like Mar-vell.
> >It's time for Jean Grey to come back from
> >the grave and make Phoenix an A-list female superhero, not one of
> >Bendis's beloved 70's C-listers.
>
> Phoenix is merely a beloved 70's B-lister, so I don't see much
> difference.
Phoenix is one of the most powerful characters at Marvel, much less
the most powerful female character. And she was part of the A-list X-
Men line up at what many consider their peak, not to mention the focus
of it's most famous storyline, which was the focus of the third X-Men
film. That's a far sight above C-List and nothing Spiderwoman or Ms.
Marvel have done even comes close. And she's an original character,
not some feminized knock-off created to protect a copyright.
>A-list characters are not born, they are promoted from
> the B- and C-lists. If anything, Ms. Marvel carries the company brand
> in her name so you'd think they would want to capitalize on that.
Oh, that makes sense. "We're going to promote this character more
because our name is there, not because they're at all original or
popular." Is that why D-Man was never successful at Marvel? Because
they resented the "D" in his name because they thought it made people
think of "DC"? That's the kind of decision suits make that drives
creative people to drink.
And Marvel does just find being represented by the A-list-from-birth,
Spider-man. Or maybe they should call him The *Marvelous* Spider-man
to get their "brand" out there more.
Sorry, if I sound overly bitter, but I work in advertising and that
type of thing (brand pushing masquerading as a creative decision) just
annoys the hell out of me.
Daibhid Ceanaideach
<timt...@gmail.com> did say:
> A-list characters are not born, they are
> promoted from the B- and C-lists.
That's the kind of thinking that leads to Marvel (and DC)
repeatedly pushing solo books for characters people aren't
that interested in, on the grounds we're bound to start buying
them eventually. It doesn't work that way. The A-list became
the A-list at the start of the Silver Age, and have been there
ever since (the only exception I can think of being
Wolverine). In fact, if you haven't been around since the
seventies, you don't stand much chance of getting on the B-
list, either...
--
Dave
Official Absentee of EU Skiffeysoc
http://sesoc.eusa.ed.ac.uk/
"I'm still here with the eyes of a child,
The wonder never grows old."
-"Hearthammer", Runrig
grinningdemon
I love the character...the name Spiderwoman doesn't really fit...her
powers don't resemble a spider in any way...she doesn't really keep
her ID a secret anyway so she should just pull and Jean Grey and start
going by her real name...or else come up with something that makes
sense....the name fit's the second Spiderwoman (another great
character) much better.
>
>> >It's time for Jean Grey to come back from
>> >the grave and make Phoenix an A-list female superhero, not one of
>> >Bendis's beloved 70's C-listers.
>>
>> Phoenix is merely a beloved 70's B-lister, so I don't see much
>> difference.
>
>Phoenix is one of the most powerful characters at Marvel, much less
>the most powerful female character. And she was part of the A-list X-
>Men line up at what many consider their peak, not to mention the focus
>of it's most famous storyline, which was the focus of the third X-Men
>film. That's a far sight above C-List and nothing Spiderwoman or Ms.
>Marvel have done even comes close. And she's an original character,
>not some feminized knock-off created to protect a copyright.
Phoenix is too powerful to have around...she doesn't fit in the Marvel
Universe...she's like the Sentry...too powerful and makes everyone
around him/her superfluous...which is why HE sucks and SHE dies in
every other appearance (or else has to be de-powered in some
way)...plus, her character is basically a joke at this point...and
she's the center of one of the most ridiculous and overdone love
triangles in comics...and you know they won't bring her back without
flogging that particular dead horse once again...so let her stay
dead...it's not like she doesn't show up from time to time
anyway...personally, I much prefer the younger, drama-free version
from X-Men: First Class.
If we're talking female X-Men here, I'd much prefer Storm or Rogue get
a push as solo super-heroines...they're both powerful, popular, and
have interesting backstories...and Storm, at least, has been getting a
lot more exposure lately anyway.