odditycollector: Supergirl hovering in black silhouette except for the red crest. Cape fluttering. Background is a roiling, raining sky. (Default)
odditycollector ([personal profile] odditycollector) wrote2006-04-19 08:34 pm

This would have been easier if I could draw.

I really should know better, but I clicked on a link to the DC message boards, topic of the new Frank Miller cover.

In summary... this is why I’m going to stay way the hell over here okay thanks. However, one exchange did catch my attention and would not let me shake it as it might have a sane person.

[livejournal.com profile] maelithil:
Depicting [women] as an ass, a pair of tits, some gorgeous thighs is doing them a disservice. Distilling them into nothing but their sexual attributes is objectifying. And that's exactly what this cover does.


Random Fanboy:
And notice that Superman's chest is OFTEN a whole panel unto itself. Not Superman fighting the bad guy. Not Superman standing full figure. Superman's chest. Just his chest. His huge, massive, S-draped, extraterrestrially muscular chest. Is Superman being objectified? Is he being used? Should I cry for Superman?


And. Just. What? This is the counterexample?

But! Maybe it’s not that his logic is just that scary. Maybe it's hard to understand what she’s talking about because it really, honestly is that there’s no comparable example featuring a male denizen of the DCU. I mean, even the occasional Nightwing crotch shot *tries* to have context.

Obviously, something had to be done. For The Good Of Fandom.

Luckily, much like Miller, I have no shame.

 
Totally Appropriate Covers (with bonus, never before seen script excerpts!)

 



Hal’s flying away from us through a generic starfield, nothing interesting to see except him. Have him wriggle around, giving us a good shot of his package. Add some details, something fancy for the fanboys to drool over, but don’t let it draw attention away from the point of the cover – that Kyle has nothing, NOTHING, on my boy Hal.

 



Be careful with this one – we don’t want Supes to come off as too powerful, too imposing. Maybe have him lean a bit, off balance, the better to show off his *well filled* briefs. He's fiddling with the waist line, such a cock *heh* tease. He knows he’s got what we want, and if we turn the cover, he’ll let us have it.

 



Well, we’ve done just about every variation on the theme by now, so let’s go back to the basics: Black on black, a full cover shot of Batman’s ass. Add in the utility belt for colour – give it that Sin City look. Show me thick, powerful legs under that latex or whatever the hell he wears. Clenched butt muscles. Make it obvious this is no BatGIRL we’re talking about.


free hit counter

Re: nuts

[identity profile] moochymonster.livejournal.com 2006-07-14 07:42 pm (UTC)(link)
Christ. Don't bring Europe into this.

Re: nuts

(Anonymous) 2006-11-26 05:35 pm (UTC)(link)
Yes, 'Europe' isn't the third world. I don't know what this 'daily struggle' is that you speak of, because as a European (OK, as a Brit, but that makes me European...), I don't know what you're talking about. Sophistication does not, nor ever had an 'f' in it. Also, I know we have a famous sense of humour here, but I really, really fail to see what is funny about the cover or showing women as nothing but inflatable dolls.

Frank Miller is not an awful artist in himself. He is capable of sexy, anatomically reasonable art that isn't too exaggerated by sexual fetishes. But that cover, in itself was not artistically good. The ribcage was impossible, the hips and waist severely and impossibly twisted, and the buttocks likewise impossible. If you can't admit that, then maybe you're the one who refuses to see the truth because of your preferences for his art.

If you're only allowed to have an opinion if you've gone to art school, why are you commenting? and what is this mysterious 'or something' that also gives you the right to express your opinion? Every opinion whether for or against this art has equal right to be expressed.

Also, women need the kind of men who think these female representations are realistic or acceptable, and that women need to conform to them, to tell them what feminism is and isn't? You don't need to be puritanical to notice that women in Western Comics are sex objects first, and characters not just second, but last. If it's a puritanical, obsessive bubble, it must be a very big one, because it probably encompasses nearly half the population on this planet.