Page 5 of 13 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 185
  1. #61
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    17

    Default

    What annoys me about this whole thing is this is basically censorship. I have zero problem with Marvel, or any other publisher, making their books more inclusive. Quite right too. What I do have a problem with is certain covers or artists being singled out as "bad" or "sexist" or "a hack". It's the publisher's right to hire who they want and use the covers they want. If you don't like it, you have the right not to buy it. If enough people feel the same, the book gets cancelled and those behind it don't get hired again. You also have the right to be offended by it.

    What you don't have the right to do, is decide for everyone else what they can and can't like or choose to buy. I seem to remember we had this same uproar about an Adam Hughes Mary Jane statue - one hardly anyone would have paid any attention to without someone online being particularly vocal about it. Same here. It's a variant (I don't know the ratio, but if it's like Manara's other variants, quite hard to find). Hardly anyone is likely to even see one in the stores. Yet it's been reproduced on every bloody geek culture website and given an exposure it would never otherwise have had and, I bet, a nice sales boost to the new Spider-woman series for Marvel (Boycott? Yeah right! Like that always works).

    There are books that aren't for me - I ignore them. There are covers that are, frankly, appalling and I wonder why the artist was even paid for such shoddy work. They show poor draftsmanship, far worse than Manara's "neck", and lack of attention to things like backgrounds and positioning. So to single one Manara cover out as anatomically dubious I find very hard to take seriously. There are literally loads of them, but I guess they don't quite fit in with this PC witch hunt so get a free pass and a gentle tutting and shake of the head instead.

    And for the record, I have no self interest in this. I buy most of my comics digitally these days so I'm not going to be buying expensive variants. I'm undecided whether or not to give Spider-woman a go, and if I do it will be the digital version which has the regular cover anyway. I just find this PC witch hunt disturbing, fuelled by people who don't seem to grasp the fact that comics have their own unique language where anything goes and seem to want to make them as bland and derivative as every other form of entertainment. You only have to turn on MTV (not that anyone watches MTV these days) to see far more blatant examples of sexism and exploitation of women than one man's painting of a fictional character, designed to get hardcore comic fans to buy expensive variants.

  2. #62
    Likeable emac1790's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    KAOS Headquaters
    Posts
    755

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ennisellis View Post
    What annoys me about this whole thing is this is basically censorship. I have zero problem with Marvel, or any other publisher, making their books more inclusive. Quite right too. What I do have a problem with is certain covers or artists being singled out as "bad" or "sexist" or "a hack". It's the publisher's right to hire who they want and use the covers they want. If you don't like it, you have the right not to buy it. If enough people feel the same, the book gets cancelled and those behind it don't get hired again. You also have the right to be offended by it.

    What you don't have the right to do, is decide for everyone else what they can and can't like or choose to buy. I seem to remember we had this same uproar about an Adam Hughes Mary Jane statue - one hardly anyone would have paid any attention to without someone online being particularly vocal about it. Same here. It's a variant (I don't know the ratio, but if it's like Manara's other variants, quite hard to find). Hardly anyone is likely to even see one in the stores. Yet it's been reproduced on every bloody geek culture website and given an exposure it would never otherwise have had and, I bet, a nice sales boost to the new Spider-woman series for Marvel (Boycott? Yeah right! Like that always works).

    There are books that aren't for me - I ignore them. There are covers that are, frankly, appalling and I wonder why the artist was even paid for such shoddy work. They show poor draftsmanship, far worse than Manara's "neck", and lack of attention to things like backgrounds and positioning. So to single one Manara cover out as anatomically dubious I find very hard to take seriously. There are literally loads of them, but I guess they don't quite fit in with this PC witch hunt so get a free pass and a gentle tutting and shake of the head instead.

    And for the record, I have no self interest in this. I buy most of my comics digitally these days so I'm not going to be buying expensive variants. I'm undecided whether or not to give Spider-woman a go, and if I do it will be the digital version which has the regular cover anyway. I just find this PC witch hunt disturbing, fuelled by people who don't seem to grasp the fact that comics have their own unique language where anything goes and seem to want to make them as bland and derivative as every other form of entertainment. You only have to turn on MTV (not that anyone watches MTV these days) to see far more blatant examples of sexism and exploitation of women than one man's painting of a fictional character, designed to get hardcore comic fans to buy expensive variants.
    Where's the censorship? Indifference, yes. Outrage, yes. Telling people not to buy a variant cover, I haven't seen that. No outside force stopping Marvel from releasing the variant, so how is it censorship?
    A man so unassuming, so modest, so sweet and warm that you take one look at him, and you like him.

  3. #63

    Default

    I still don't see the big deal. A lot of these same people that are upset will be salivating over the release of 50 shades of gray. A movie that objectifies women and make men look like freaks.

    I still think a bigger problem is marvel's male dominated world. There are no women on the Illuminati making the big calls. They have no say and will live in whatever world the room full of men think is best for them.

  4. #64

    Default

    on the cover you are supposed to go with more realism I guess
    Where did you ever get that idea?
    “Sometimes I think the universe just waits for me to get cocky.”

  5. #65
    Senior Member Arvandor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    289

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by horrorcowboy View Post
    P.S Getting real tired of the, "well I try my best" argument from artists on anatomy. If a mechanic 'tried their best' to fix your car and it exploded, they would be fired, and you would sue. When your a damn professional you should have basic anatomy figured the hell out. If a novel was just nothing but spelling errors and grammatical problems, hell if a comic writer was called on bad dialog " well I try my best, sorry my characters can't speak to each other. " it would never fly, but an artist can do it. Sure there is a matter of artistic style (which only seems to be used when we have just butchered female anatomy, or you are Rob Leidfield ) which is valid, but basic anatomy really needs to be there.. some how. This image... the back of her head is glued to her neck.
    I agree that its a bad cover on anatomical and perspective grounds. I disagree with the complaints on sexism grounds. I do wish the two complaints wouldn't be lumped together.
    Virtue untested is innocence.

    Always remember, when you choose the lesser of two evils, it is still an evil.

  6. #66
    Gamebreaker Wellman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    159

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arvandor View Post
    I agree that its a bad cover on anatomical and perspective grounds. I disagree with the complaints on sexism grounds. I do wish the two complaints wouldn't be lumped together.
    Yeah, I honestly feel like I have seen Spider-Woman and even Spider-Man do a similar pose on covers before, it frankly isn't great and I get why some would think sexist but I think people are over blowing it and its significance.

  7. #67
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    76

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by horrorcowboy View Post
    P.S Getting real tired of the, "well I try my best" argument from artists on anatomy. If a mechanic 'tried their best' to fix your car and it exploded, they would be fired, and you would sue. When your a damn professional you should have basic anatomy figured the hell out.
    Are you an artist? I'm just curious. I've been doing art for about 25 years, 21 of them in a professional capacity. Drawing's not "my thing," but I paint & sculpt. My professional focus is in CG character work for animation and 3D illustration - where both of those traditional irl skills come into play.

    What I can tell you is this: Every day is a learning experience. I don't care if you've been on the job for 40 days or 40 years. You can learn something new each day. There's always room for improvement. I don't think that there's one artist who will tell you that there's not. I know all of my muscle groups, all of the primary concepts of weight & mass, and so on. Still... Every new project is just a bit different and more refined than the last, even after 25 years. My knowledge and how I apply it changes just a little every go around.

    The funny thing about artistic anatomy is that everybody's a critic, but not everybody actually has an eye for it. Sometimes, what looks amazingly wrong is shockingly right and what looks perfect simply doesn't translate well into 3D. This is especially true when it comes to perspective, proportion, and range of motion. Certain flaws and accuracies are very obvious. Others aren't.

    I'm not saying that you can't critique this stuff. You certainly can. However, unless you're in a position to do better or as well, stop acting like an armchair artist. It's arrogant and obnoxious. Unless you're in the thick of it and this is something you do daily, you just...don't...know.

    FTR, your whole mechanic analogy is moot anyway. While there is definitely something technical to all art, creators aren't machines. They aren't technicians or button monkeys. There's no "make cool" button on the digitizer. There's no "master brush" that makes your painting turn out perfect. There's no self-sculpting clay. Whereas you can master fixing a car engine and do a perfect job nearly every time out, art is far less rigid. There's a certain creative fluidity to art that doesn't exist in something like engineering. I don't just open up ZBrush & Maya and haphazardly push buttons like a coked up chimp. Because it's still art, it's dynamic and requires not just a technical eye, but a creative one. When I pick up some clay and an armature, I'm not following a step-by-step baker's recipe or how-to from a home repair manual. That is not art. This is not what artist's do. Fixing a car engine and drawing/sculpting a fantasy female are VASTLY different tasks.

  8. #68
    BANNED greengoliath's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Hulkbuster, nevada
    Posts
    1

    Default

    It has to be the culture. As a french, it's hard not to see the social justice warirors on this case as conservatives, far-right puritans so close to the stereotypes of the american midwest at first i thought it was a joke.

    I can't imagine a single left sided organisation in Europe, or even a centrist organisation, or anything not held by catholic or muslim fanatics that would have any problem with this cover. Then again, being a leftist in Europe means caring about things such as the separation of capital and work, or redistribution, not commenting comic book coversz, so what do we know?

    Social justice warriors should ask themselves why there hasn't been any leftist american government (not even socialist, mind you) in the last 70 years. This is why. Litterally: bullshit debates.

  9. #69
    Senior Member Shinglepants's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Manchester, England
    Posts
    662

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Themysciran View Post
    Exactly! Just last week I was trying to get a friend of mine to try comics, but she wasn't going for it because she associates superhero comics with poorly drawn and objectified women. I tried arguing that things are changing, particularly at Marvel, but then Marvel went and made a liar out of me.
    So, this variant cover just eradicates the work done thus far? Solo's for Cap M, Black Widow, Storm, Elektra, She-Hulk, Ms. Marvel. McKelvie's and Anka's classy redesigns for Captain Marvel and Psylocke's trashy outfits? Carol Corps?

    Quote Originally Posted by emac1790 View Post
    Sentry ripping Ares in half is worse than picture of a woman sticking her ass in the air. But the Sentry picture is not the cover.
    But anybody who read the book saw the Sentry/Ares moment because it was in the pages. Not sure what the ratios are like but most people who pick up Spider-Woman will not see the variant cover.

    Quote Originally Posted by Omega Key View Post
    I think if this same picture wasnt drawn by Manara (who apparantly is a 'porn' artist) there would have been no hubbub about this. Apparantly we're now in an alternate universe where all those covers done by the likes of Frank Cho, Greg Land, David Finch, J. Scott Cambell etc. etc. didn't happen, that this cover is supposedly any worse.
    Yeah! It's just the worse. Mountains out of molehills and all that.

  10. #70
    Senior Member Mr. Medusa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    1,009

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jwatson View Post
    I still don't see the big deal. A lot of these same people that are upset will be salivating over the release of 50 shades of gray. A movie that objectifies women and make men look like freaks.
    One key difference that movie is supposed to be erotic.

  11. #71

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vworp Vworp View Post
    Did they?

    Then why release it as part of Spider-Verse? What's the marketing campaign? "Hey female readers, check out this title where a major female character's first story in her solo book is as a supporting character to Spider-Man, because we don't have enough faith in female characters to sell comics on their own merits."
    They would have done the same thing if it was about a male character they could link to Marvel's most popular hero.
    Sincerely,
    Thomas Mets

  12. #72
    pygophile and podophile Dr. Cheesesteak's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    344

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by somebody View Post
    Forget the whole b-hole thing. Logically thinking about it, if it wasn't skin tight the crotch area would rip open over time due to how spiders spread out.
    I am a bit surprised it seems ppl (and artists) don't quite understand how, even skin-tight, tights work. Her ass looks as if it's naked and body painted. Even the tightest of tights would still have a stretch over the crack in that position. I mean, if she stands up, does she have a massive wedgy?

    But maybe they do understand, but just don't care? Either way, it's getting me kinda hot and bothered...
    Comics were definitely happier, breezier and more confident in their own strengths before Hollywood and the Internet turned the business of writing superhero stories into the production of low budget storyboards or, worse, into conformist, fruitless attempts to impress or entertain a small group of people who appear to hate comics and their creators. -- Grant Morrison

    Aman, A&tO, Bgirl, GAcad, GbM, Grayson, HQ, JL, Klarion, Lobo, Multiversity, Sgirl, ST, ToS, WW
    quartets of indies

  13. #73
    Looking for The Massive afrocarter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Toronto, ON
    Posts
    111

    Default

    Wow. I didn't know there was so much criticism over this cover, but it is clearly warranted. To put it bluntly, it looks like Spider-Woman is getting ready to take it up the butt. Legs spread, back arched....yep, it appears this cover artist took a page out of Greg Land's playbook. Speaking of which, if this title is going to be in the hands of these two creepers, well, good luck.

    I think, ultimately, people want creators to focus on making a woman superhero strong and courageous...not erotic. LOL wow.

  14. #74
    Senior Member Mecegirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    147

    Default

    This isn't a simple issue of European vs American values. Her butt was so prominent because of the angle Manera chose, and because he didn't draw her clothing correctly. I'm gonna post picture of a redraw that someone did of the Manera cover.




    As far as a crouching pose is concerned head down, ass up works for porn for obvious reasons. And I'm sure that its just that Manera is so used to drawing women in a crouched position like that, that he did so with Spiderwoman without thinking. But it just doesn't work for a superhero comic book cover.

  15. #75
    I am Groot! ExcelsiorPrime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Guts over Fear
    Posts
    2,036

    Default









    “Humans see what they want to see.”
    My webcomic Updated Weekly
    Twitter
    Blog

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •