|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2014 14:57:24 GMT -5
Or, you know, it could be new creators with a different take on the character. But that wouldn't fulfill the fanboy glee to prejudge. I don't see people complaining when a teen character is aged five years overnight so she can have big giant jugs and constantly be in sexual situations.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2014 14:59:00 GMT -5
Well that look is gone soon, to be replaced with this.... -M Hideous- she will strike fear in the hearts of teens shopping at the mall. Very soon we will see a teen version of Martian Manhunter in MC Hammer pants. She's much more intimidating when she's flying at you spread eagle and pelvis first in a rubber BDSM bodysuit.
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Jul 13, 2014 15:55:06 GMT -5
Hideous- she will strike fear in the hearts of teens shopping at the mall. Very soon we will see a teen version of Martian Manhunter in MC Hammer pants. She's much more intimidating when she's flying at you spread eagle and pelvis first in a rubber BDSM bodysuit. Comics are serious bizness for serious adults. It's no place for kids or fun!
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Jul 13, 2014 16:21:47 GMT -5
Or, you know, it could be new creators with a different take on the character. But that wouldn't fulfill the fanboy glee to prejudge. I don't see people complaining when a teen character is aged five years overnight so she can have big giant jugs and constantly be in sexual situations. I actually do complain about that, too. It especially annoys me when some characters age, while others don't... like Kitty Pride. She was, what 13 when she debuted? While the other X-men were in their mid 20s (though most actually like early-mid 30s). Now, she's in her mid-20s... and so is everyone else. Then there's Franklin Richards.. which I'm sure Tolworthy could write at least 20 pages about (and probably has on his site)
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Jul 13, 2014 16:23:59 GMT -5
RE: Batgirl... I don't think that particular splash (which is pretty badterrible) is typical... I have most of the issues, and I don't recall it being bad... one could certainly say Barbara Gordon shouldn't be so... top heavy, but that's something that changes from artist to artist for just about every female character.
|
|
|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on Jul 13, 2014 16:59:15 GMT -5
She's much more intimidating when she's flying at you spread eagle and pelvis first in a rubber BDSM bodysuit. Comics are serious bizness for serious adults. It's no place for kids or fun! And they haven't really been for the last 25 years or so. I can't think of one comic I've bought off the shelf since i started 20 years ago, that wasn't either ridiculously targeted at kids or was an adult comic. If DC needs to turn Batgirl into Lady Death to sell, they damn sure will do it. (Not to say that just because a female character is blatantly sexualized, that's all there is to them.)
|
|
Crimebuster
CCF Podcast Guru
Making comics!
Posts: 3,946
|
Post by Crimebuster on Jul 13, 2014 17:28:47 GMT -5
I think the problem many fans have isn't really with the new take on Batgirl - which looks interesting to me - but with expectations. Marvel and DC have created and continue to foster an expectation that there is a continuity that matters in the shared universes their characters inhabit. Yet, both companies ignore this all the time, either purposefully for "creative" reasons, or accidentally, through sheer oversight and disinterest. And so fans are constantly ticked off, because they are being promised one thing - that continuity matters - and being given another thing entirely.
For people like me, and clearly some of you as well, who have given up on Marvel and DC and the whole shared universe thing, these kind of changes are mostly irrelevant - what matters is interesting, good stories. But for fans who are still buying into the myth the big two are selling, changes like this that don't seem to make any sense are just more smacks in the face. So in a sense it doesn't matter to many fans how good the resulting comic is, what they want is for the company to care as much about the "universe" as the companies claim they do and as much as the fans actually do. And since the companies don't actually care about that sort of thing anymore... stuff like this happens.
I don't really blame the fans for being irritated. Selectively ignoring whichever aspects of "continuity" (including characterizations) they want in the name of storytelling over the past decade has resulted in far more bad comics than good ones. Marvel and DC want to have their cake and eat it too, which almost never works for anyone involved. And this Batgirl thing is a perfect case in point: Fans invested in the DCU are up in arms because they've (seemingly) de-aged the character without warning, while fans like me who might find it interesting are going to skip the book because it's tied into a bunch of continuity we don't want to get involved in.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2014 18:20:10 GMT -5
I don't see people complaining when a teen character is aged five years overnight so she can have big giant jugs and constantly be in sexual situations. I actually do complain about that, too. It especially annoys me when some characters age, while others don't... like Kitty Pride. She was, what 13 when she debuted? While the other X-men were in their mid 20s (though most actually like early-mid 30s). Now, she's in her mid-20s... and so is everyone else. Then there's Franklin Richards.. which I'm sure Tolworthy could write at least 20 pages about (and probably has on his site) I don't like the fact that none of the woman A-list heroes will ever hit age 30, none of the male A-list heroes will ever hit age fifty. But as long as that's not going to happen I can deal with a character turning from fanservice drek to something someone might want to read, even if the character reverts in age a few years. If she can go from crippled to swinging from skyscraper to skyscraper from a rope, she can become slightly younger I guess.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2014 18:22:30 GMT -5
(Not to say that just because a female character is blatantly sexualized, that's all there is to them.) No, but it seriously detracts from any merit the comic may have otherwise, when the sexualization reaches a certain point.
|
|
|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on Jul 13, 2014 18:32:19 GMT -5
(Not to say that just because a female character is blatantly sexualized, that's all there is to them.) No, but it seriously detracts from any merit the comic may have otherwise, when the sexualization reaches a certain point. Well sure, there is always an extreme that can be taken in either direction. I guess it's more of a "judge the book by it's cover" thing. Just assuming that Lady Death for example is just a fanboy's jerk off dream isn't an accurate portrayal of the character. I have a good collection of Lady Death comics and in the correct writer's hands that wants to tell a good story, she's an interesting character no matter if gravity would pull her face first to the ground.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2014 18:44:10 GMT -5
I've never read a Lady Death comic, but I do put it in a different realm than Batgirl. Because Lady Death is not a Saturday Morning kids cartoon. Lady Death lunchboxes aren't for sale at Toys R Us. I don't like sexualizing characters we were all introduced to when we were nine, and continue to introduce to children when they are nine.
I don't think super hero comics can't have cheesecake. I just think the licenses that are popular as kids franchises shouldn't be the ones used. I don't think they should share the universe, or even the imprint as the kids heroes. So Lady Death pretty much fits the bill of acceptable cheesecake super hero comics to me. I still don't read it, but it doesn't piss me off like when Wonder Woman is in a thong.
|
|
|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on Jul 13, 2014 19:03:21 GMT -5
That's fair enough reasoning. I guess starting and collecting long after many of the members here, I never saw comics as kids entertainment. By the time I got in the game it was an adult entertainment genre. Like horror movies have gone. It's society's standards for what is acceptable for a person of a certain age can see. I've let my son see Lon Chaney Jr as Wolfman, but wouldn't let him (and doubt from reading the book I would be able to stomach) the remake with Bencio del Torro. So I guess, in a long winded comment, I agree with you. But I guess I've given up on the battle. It's overwhelming the direction that society takes with their morals and there is only so much one person can do to change things.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2014 19:12:00 GMT -5
That's fair enough reasoning. I guess starting and collecting long after many of the members here, I never saw comics as kids entertainment. By the time I got in the game it was an adult entertainment genre. I think there should be a balance. I don't mind female characters being sexualised, but don't necessarily want to see that in a comic geared for young readers. Which is why I appreciate comics being rated. If Batgirl appears in a Vertigo book in sexy poses or riding a sybian, it's cool. Same goes for gritty characters like Kingpin. I don't want to see a maximum crime lord reduced to kid's entertainment and speaking like Gargamel in the Smurfs. No underworld character who deals in drugs, prostitution & murder talks kiddie.
|
|
|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on Jul 13, 2014 20:49:09 GMT -5
Yes there should be Miss Jezebel but this is entertainment and adults have money and kids don't. And if kids do it's through their parents. Why shoot for a 10% percent demographic when you are making cash hand over fist for the other 90%. And since they're making that money from the 90% why not forget the other 10% all together?
I like that comics are rated too. I like that video games are rated. But a rating also only goes so far as to tell you what is allowed in that specific rating. I'll let my kids (8 and 11) play Gears of War before I let them play Grand Theft Auto. I let them watch Tenchi Muyo and other anime they like, despite, gasp, nudity, even though it's not sexualized as the the Japanese culture take community baths.
I don't think that the problem is that there is so many exposed and demeaned characters out there in forms of entertainment, I think the problem is that they sell, and if something sells than it is going to continue to be produced. Comics seem to be the only corner of entertainment that will not budge from this sales point. There are plenty of movies that are great for my kids that I enjoy too, like the Despicable Me movies, of which I was just as entertained as they were.
I don't think that comics are going to change. Mainstream are never going to be targeted at kids. The comics kids do get are that ridiculous stuff like super-deformed versions of Marvel characters. As I mentioned in my previous post, I don't think it's what is in comics and other media that is a bad thing, but the context itself. Does any one ever complain the the cheesecake (damn I hate that word) of Betty's role in the Rocketeer? It wasn't offensive visually, but it was no different than what people are arguing in this thread about Batgirl. Just because it doesn't "look" offensive, doesn't mean that in context it isn't just as offensive as the 90's bad girls no one can seem to stomach. Context can be more persuasive than content.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2014 20:58:51 GMT -5
That's fair enough reasoning. I guess starting and collecting long after many of the members here, I never saw comics as kids entertainment. By the time I got in the game it was an adult entertainment genre. I think there should be a balance. I don't mind female characters being sexualised, but don't necessarily want to see that in a comic geared for young readers. Which is why I appreciate comics being rated. If Batgirl appears in a Vertigo book in sexy poses or riding a sybian, it's cool. Same goes for gritty characters like Kingpin. I don't want to see a maximum crime lord reduced to kid's entertainment and speaking like Gargamel in the Smurfs. No underworld character who deals in drugs, prostitution & murder talks kiddie. I sincerely hope they keep Batgirl out of Vertigo. And if Kingpin isn't for kids, he shouldn't be the arch nemesis of characters that are. Spiderman is for kids. Daredevil is for kids. No matter how much sex and violence you add to Spiderman, he's still a patriotic colored spandex muscleman who swings from buildings and punches bad guys in kids "learn to read" books. That's what he will always be. And that will always be a kid thing.
|
|