Quick question for all 3 of our readers: Would you like more recap and less review? I personally try to avoid recaps because they make for long blog posts (longer than now, even) but some people prefer to know what's going on if they don't read. Leave a comment and let us know!
DC:
Wonder Woman #600 ****
Ok, let's get it out of the way: I like Diana's new costume. Yeah, the jacket and stirrup pants aren't exactly as cool as they could be, but her old costume, as iconic as it is, is ridiculously impractical. There's no protection, there's no utility; she's running around in a shiny bathing suit. Sure, she's an Amazon warrior, but that should give her the sense to actually wear armor when fighting. It needed an update badly, and I like the direction they decided to go in. Also, I can't shake the feeling that there is a hint of misogyny in the loud outcry about the change in costume, but I may be succumbing to the crush to be PC.
Golden Lasso of Truth, Blue Bolero Jacket of JUSTICE..
Batman Beyond #1 ****
I've loved Batman Beyond ever since the cartoon. I like the highly stylized art that the series is known for, and I enjoy the concept of a new Batman. Plus all his gadgets and suit abilities are kinda really cool. I was very relieved when the inside art didn't match the cover, which I thought made Terry look kind of ridiculously too buff. The story itself was enjoyable, although I suspected the final twist the whole time I was reading it. My question is where they'll go with it. Clearly that villain is as old as Bruce, shouldn't Terry have a leg up? Definitely excited for the rest of this miniseries.
Green Lantern #55 ****
I love Green Lantern, and that love helped me overlook my dislike of Lobo. Ever since the Justice League cartoon I've found Lobo to be loud and obnoxious and I can't shake the feeling that he smells, all of which are things I do not like in characters, even villains. But the fight with the different Lanterns was kind of awesome, and I totally didn't see the twist at the end coming. I don't know what game Atrocitus is playing but I seriously cannot wait to find out.
Flash #3 ***
I want Francis Manapul to draw my life. I love his art. There aren't many artists whose work I know straight away but Manapul is definitely one of them. Gift Idea: A signed print. Just saying. Although Johns isn't doing bad work himself. The Captain Boomerang and his Black Kaboomerangs of Death plays back into the mystery pervading the Brightest Day series, and whatever is happening with this future killing has me hooked. Time Travel done well can be exceptionally satisfying, and I think Johns is giving us just enough that I trust he's not fucking it up without giving away the whole story. And what's that business about Iris? Consistently solid stuff.
Marvel:
Secret Avengers #2 ***
I know it's only issue 2, but already I think Secret Avengers is my favorite of the four new Avengers books. While I hate Beast for past transgressions, the rest of the team is just random enough to really catch my interest. I'll admit I had a little bit of trouble following the story this issue because I didn't completely remember last issue, but I've learned anytime a person has all-black eyes, bad things are about to happen. It's like the Universal Symbol for "You're fucked." The snake-crown-thing is slightly convoluted, but I'm sure by the end I'll get it.
Death of Dracula ****
I don't quite get vampires in the Marvel Universe. Maybe it's because I get vampires so many other places, they run together. So as I understand the rules, they can't do sunlight, they have red-eyes, and they come in many different varieties? And Vampirism is a virus, not some supernatural thing? I need a frigging chart of Vampire rules. Anyway, the power struggle that took place in this issue between the two sons of Dracula was very well handled. You knew that each development wasn't all that it seemed, and while the twists didn't come out of left field I think they were very well written. The after-effects of the little coup is going to be playing out in the new X-Men titles, which gives me more hope for the new titles than I had when I first heard about it. Just in general, though, I'm withholding judgment until Marvel proves to me this isn't a bandwagon gimmick to get readers.
Recap vs Review? Hmm...Whatever works best for you. Either way it is enjoyable reading.
ReplyDeleteOh and good luck with the signed print;)
Recap while reviewing.
ReplyDeleteWW: I hate her new costume. For a couple of reasons. First of all, there was nothing wrong with her old costume. You say that there was no protection and no utility, adding pants doesn't change that fact. This is Wonder Woman, she's got super strength and durability, she doesn't need armor. Humans really have nothing that can harm her. And again, she doesn't need protecting. This new costume, if you can call it that because it's really just street clothes, makes her look like a child. She's dressed up the same way as Wonder Girl and that one is a teenager. There was no need to change her outfit, because this new one didn't add anything. In fact, it looks just like her outfit from when she lost the title Wonder Woman. Her costume was iconic. She appeared in a time when woman still did not have the same social standing as men and she was a female role model. She wasn't covered up head to toe, she wasn't a sidekick, she wasn't some ditzy loser. She was a princess Amazon Warrior. Covering her up does nothing for that. You want to talk impractical, those tight pants and that tight jacket would be nothing more than a hinderance in a fight, they're not like Batman's costume and provide protection, and her bracelets now resemble a raver chick's glove.
BB: We've discussed how I hated the art in this. I mean, Terry goes from looking 18-38. Stylized or not, that's just wrong.
GL: I don't think Atrocitus is playing a game so much. I just assumed that he wanted to save "The Butcher", the rage entity, and needed help doing so.
F: What would you want a print of?
SA: Don't read it.
DoD: I loved this.
WW. I LIKE the new costume!! It's not tight. It's Spandex and that thing has a lot of give therefore a hell of a lot more useful/practical than that get up she had to wear! Amazon woman or not, it's kind of hard to get work done when your waist is so cinched in you can't breathe:)
ReplyDeleteAnd honestly? How can you possibly fight crime if at the back of your mind you're worried about wardrobe malfuntions?
Personally, growing up watching the show, I always used to 'wonder' where the rest of her clothes were and it actually irked the bejusus out of me that most of her clothes seemed to be missing.[Was it perhaps in a secret compartment of her invisible plane and she couldn't find it?]
I agree that she is iconic, however putting some clothes on her does not detract from that.If anything, it proves the point that you can be a bad ass FEMALE superhero AND keep your clothes on, all the while not showing your goods to your fellow superhero colleagues.
See, in my mind Diana never thought about a wardrobe malfunction, just like in my mind Superman doesn't worry about a wedgie. She's god-like, she doesn't have to worry about her clothes falling off, unless she wants them too that is. ;) (it looks weird on my computer screen right now, but that's a pervy wink)
ReplyDeleteMaybe I'm just reading too much into it. But after reading Superman, where Lois Lane became the dependent woman now that her man was back. It just seems like they've chosen a strange moment to say, hey look she's badass and fully clothed.
On another note, sure she's Amazonian, but she can't reverse time. Now the Holy Trinity of DC looks like Two men and a teenager. Sounds like a bad porno if you ask me and an illegal one.
There are two debates here: 1) Did Wonder Woman need a new costume? and 2) Is the new costume a good choice? The second question is largely a question of taste. I said in my review I didn't think the new costume was the best it could have been, but that I still liked the new style. I'm sure there are things that could have come out differently, but I think it makes sense. I agree it's a little too street-clothes, but that makes sense given the direction JMS is taking the story (did you read WW 600?)
ReplyDeleteAs to the first question: How can you say there is nothing wrong with her original costume? You think it's comfortable to be out fighting when your worried your vagina or a random boob is going to fall out? And while yes, normal humans can't hurt her, how often does Diana fight normal humans? She fights monsters and aliens and gods and superhumans. A corrolary would be, how would you feel if Supes was fighting in a Speedo? Sure, he's invulnerable, but it would look ridiculous. And frankly I don't know how any of these people get by without pockets. Give me Bruce's utility belt.
When Diana debuted, she wore a much longer dress. http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=26963 Over the years her bottom has gotten shorter and her tits have gotten bigger. You don't find it slightly insulting that she needs to have her stuff hanging out? Buffy managed to fight perfectly fine in jeans and a jacket. Xena wore actual armor. I appreciate the look is iconic, but beware of Sacred Cows. Wonder Woman was created as a form of female empowerment, and her costume shouldn't have anything to do with that. As Charlaine said, if putting on some damn pants takes away your power, then maybe you don't deserve the power in the first place. The woman's movement has come a long way since 1940, and she shouldn't have to pander to the baser instincts of a bunch of straight male readers.
Christ, I sound like a feminist. But I love me some Wonder Woman because of who she is, not because of what she wears. The changes to who she is make sense for this, so I'm rolling with it.
And as for Manapul's work, I'd love a print of anything not Superman. His Wonder Woman, Batman, and Flash art is all amazing.
I wrote my response before I read yours.
ReplyDeleteI agree she's a little young looking. I'm not sure if that's this one particular mock-up, or if we're going slightly back in time, or if the artist dropped the ball.
I agree about Lois, but I think that's more an unfortunate coincidence.
But like I explained, she doesn't worry about it, because it won't happen.
ReplyDeleteAlso, for the most part most of the aliens she encounters can't hurt her either. She's basically a female Superman without the weaknesses. She's the strongest female superhero in DC, that's including Supergirl, who in fact is a female Superman.
Xena practically wears the same outfit, less in some instances. And she's got armor because she's a human going up against humans, monsters, and gods. Diana, is a demi-god herself. She don't need nothing.
I never understood when people criticized women saying that no self-respecting women should show off all of their body. If it's your body, you do with it what you want.
It's not that putting her in pants takes away her power, it changes the character. That would be like changing Superman or Batman so that they no longer have capes. Putting them in jeans and a shirt. They'd look like adults who are trying to hard to relive their youth. And, they wouldn't look like Superheroes anymore, much like Wonder Woman now.
http://www.bigshinyrobot.com/reviews/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/wonderwoman.jpg
ReplyDeleteHer new costume looks like a cross between the two on the right.
Hey Charlaine,
ReplyDeleteI meant to ask earlier, which comics do you read?
Very little recap. I think the way you and Arnab have been doing it is a great mix of both.
ReplyDeleteI find it slightly silly to claim that Wonder Woman's old outfit is her demonstrating ownership of her body. This outfit was created by men, for men, despite whatever feminist intentions people want to 'make up' about the character/series/creators. It's all about T&A, and as the years passed that swimsuit got tighter, and those aforementioned assets got bigger. The only thing she's selling with that outfit is sex.
ReplyDeleteDo I have a problem with that? Not in particular. She's a comic book character; sex is a part of the industry. Look at Emma Frost (super whore) and Psylocke (still sporting a bathing suit from 1992). The problem I have is that, from an objective standpoint, Wonder Woman looks bloody ridiculous in that old thing. It really is a glorified, tacky swimsuit and frankly, I question if it EVER worked; in any event, it certainly doesn't work now. Superhero style isn't going for gawdy; it's trying to be more streamlined and have a street feel.
Do I like her new costume? Eh, I'm indifferent. It's pretty boring, and she looks like a super dyke (not that there's anything wrong with that).
Sure, she doesn't need armor so let her wear whatever she wants. I don't need armor to go the grocery store either, but in interests of taste I don't wear my argyle Ginch Gonch jock and a little American flag neckerchief just because I can.
The idea of Wonder Woman initially came from William Marston's wife, who as it turns out was not a man. William Marston himself was a feminist theorist and psychologist. So those "feminist intentions" you so offhandedly dismissed, were there from Wonder Woman's inception.
ReplyDeleteIt's true, her breasts and ass did get bigger, but the creation of the character was for men to be introduced to a sexy female figure, who could kick their asses. A the time the superhero realm was dominated by males, and Wonder Woman was born to fix that.
And what gave you the impression that superhero style is attempting to have a more street feel.
Oh and by the way, it's not an interest of taste why you don't wear your jock to the grocery store, it's a matter of getting arrested.
First off, let's watch the condescension just a bit.
ReplyDeleteThe problem with this is you just argued against yourself. You talk about how Wonder Woman is about female empowerment, but then you write about how she was created for men. That's exactly Bao's point: It was created by men for men. Yes, the idea came from his wife, and yes, he was a feminist professor, but they weren't trying to boost up a woman's opinion of herself, they were trying to stop men from being so damn misogynistic. But then she became less of a woman and more of a pin-up model because, of course, men are misogynistic.
Not to mention it's been 70 years and the superhero realm is still largely dominated by males. Name 10 big heroines, and then cross them off if they are wearing less clothing than their male counterparts. Short of some in the Bat family and Jean Grey, I'm hard-pressed. And even Jean Grey gets depicted as having larger breasts than my head. Then again so many of the major heroes are men anyway. It's part of the reason comics have such a hard time attracting female fans (I'm not saying it's the only reason at all, there is a long list, and it's also changing. I know we have female readers here).
You make it sound as if Diana chooses to wear that outfit out of some desire to show that she can be strong and naked. But at no point did I ever get the impression Diana was making a conscious choice. I however got the very strong impression that at the very least the artists were trying to portray a very specific thing: Tits and Ass.
This makes it sound like I hate Diana's original costume, and I don't. Or I'm a feminist, which I'm not. But I'm also hard-pressed to defend her outfit as anything other than iconic, and just because something's traditional is not nearly enough reason.
And as to the last point, you get arrested for wearing a jock to the store because it's indecent, as is having your tits hang out. People don't go to the store in just a bustier unless they're Lady Gaga.
How is intending to stop men from being misogynistic not female empowerment. Just because she was created for men, doesn't mean that it wasn't in the interest of female equality.
ReplyDeleteRogue, Hawkeye, Jean Grey, Batgirl, Batwoman, Hope Summers, Buffy, Kitty Pryde, Domino, Catwoman, Donna Troy, Oracle, Dove, Andrea and Michone from the Walking Dead, Monet St. Croix, Siryn/Banshee, Wonder Girl, Speedy, Jubilee, The New Mutant gals, Spider Woman
Different artists will always have different interpretations of a character, regardless of the intentions of the creator. That shouldn't detract from the creator's original intent.
My point was merely this. You get arrested if you go out in a jock, you wouldn't get arrested if you were dressed like Diana.
Female empowerment means making women feel better and stronger about themselves, I always thought. That's why Buffy and Xena are so often used as examples, because they show a strong woman who doesn't need her vajayjay hanging out.
ReplyDeleteAnd clearly we have very different definitions of "Big Heroines."
I think it says a lot that the one non-regular comics reader to chime in here likes the new costume. The whole point of the change was to draw in new readers.
This is verging on the unseemly that the two admins are arguing, so perhaps it best we move this conversation to back channels.
ReplyDeleteI know what female empowerment means. But no matter how much you make a woman feel better, the only way to truly make a difference is to change the dominant group in the society. In order to actually create a stable form of female empowerment, the male gender must be taught that there is an equality.
ReplyDeleteAnd for the record, Xena is probably the biggest slut of all the female heroines. Not only is she constantly in a state of undress, but she sleeps with practically every male with an ounce of power. Which isn't to say I don't love her, which I do.
Which one of those females do you not consider a "Big Heroine." With that in mind though, I did add 15 extra females.
That last bit only counts if he/she plans on reading the new title. Otherwise, whether or not he/she likes the costume really has no bearing; it then becomes a matter of fashion.
I did not see that last comment before writing my comment. My apologies.
ReplyDelete"It's true, her breasts and ass did get bigger, but the creation of the character was for men to be introduced to a sexy female figure, who could kick their asses." FYI, not feminism.
ReplyDeleteSee, I dismissed the feminist claims to Wonder Woman because they simply aren't true. Marston wasn't a feminist. Liking strong women and then creating one based off the domineering bitch(es) you're doinking does not make you a feminist; it makes you pathetic. And I say this because I had to research Marston for my studies.
He was a whackjob. I don't care what wikipedia tells you; he wrote nothing on feminist theory (Wonder Woman does not count). His desire wasn't to create an equal woman -- his goal was to create a female character who could hold her own with the other superheroes, but she wasn't allowed to have the same 'weapons' as her counterparts. Beauty and love, ideals that Marston had already associated as being the best qualities in a woman, were her women. Violence was left to the men. If that sounds like feminism to you, I'll eat my aforementioned jock (and my point behind that analogy was to be humorous about the situation; I would look ridiculous, just like she does. "Well, my point behind her costume is that it's tight but she won't get arrested." That's just grasping at straws; just because you don't get arrested doesn't make it appropriate or tasteful).
And that's what this about: her costume. It was hideous. Was it an important part of the image of Wonder Woman? Sure, because most of us (see Charlaine's comment about Lynda Carter; I had the exact same experience) non-comic gurus will remember Wonder Woman not as some sort of champion for women's lib who holds her own against the men in the series, but as a secretary-by-day who transforms into a silly bathing-suit clad Charlie's Angel who uses a shiny rope instead of a gun.
I'm not belittling Wonder Woman; Mattie would kill me. It's obviously much deeper than that. That being said, however iconic you think she may be, to the non-initiated, she just looked silly. If a new costume creates a renewed interest in the series, I say more power to the costume change.
Besides, change just happens. Mickey Mouse is about six billion times more iconic than Wonder Woman, and he gets updates all the time. You have to keep things modern.
Hi Arnab.
ReplyDeleteI don't read any comics per se, but I know enough from life experiences to understand and be aware of the characters discusssed.
For example,my younger brother has read comics his whole life and occasionally I've borrowed them [and yes, I know enough that you DO NOT bring food or drinks near those bad boys...and sure as hell, no greasy fingers!!!]. Watching TV shows in the *cough* 70's , 80's and beyond, and absorbing information from society and various cultures I've been exposed to has proven to be invaluable.
That is one of the reasons I like this blog :) So much new information in a wonderful format :)
I'm sure we could both go into the depths of feminism, list off a couple feminist thinkers, and both argue our points and whatever else points may arise. But at the risk of turning this comment section into a classroom, I will refrain from doing so.
ReplyDeleteI will say one thing though. Wonder Woman had the same "weapons" as her male counterparts. As previously mentioned she is the female version of Superman, without the Kryptonian and magic weakness. And as time progressed, her power structure continued to change as well. She's Amazonian, violence is part of her nature. She's killed a man. And in various depictions she has acted more as a general than Superman.
It's not really grasping at straws though, because appropriate and tasteful are a matter of opinion. I don't find half of what people wear to be tasteful and in most situations appropriate. There are tennis outfits that you would see at the US Open, the French Open, or the Australian Open, that you would not see at Wimbledon. That doesn't make the outfit any less tasteful or appropriate, just a matter of history.
The point, and I'll agree with you on this, is her costume. But that's just it, it is a costume. Taste in fashion differs from one person to another and there's really not a wrong or right, to an extent. My biggest complaint with this new look, is that it isn't a costume. She's just in street clothes. And I understand that it goes with the current story. But as I understand it, the story is meant to eventually unravel. So the question is, will the costume stay like this or change when the time comes. Because as her old history stands, this new costume doesn't fit. She's gone from becoming an Amazonian warrior to the poster child for a midlife crisis.
Which leads me to another point. To the point that was made earlier, about how she's now a role model for girls, that keeps her clothes on. She's also now sending the message that the strive is for everlasting youth. In the past she appeared in the same age range of Bruce and Clark. Now she looks to be Wonder Girl's age, Cassie not Donna Troy, who she looks younger than.
I can accept change. Batman and Robin both have had some tweaks to their costumes over the years. But none of those changes have altered the character. From everything I've read that involved Diana Prince, Wonder Woman out of costume, this costume is out of character. Admittedly I probably haven't read as much on Wonder Woman as Matt, but in everything I've read Diana has always dressed as a strong, professional woman. This woman is dressed in an uncharacteristic manner. And like I said, sure it fits the current story, but unless you retcon her entire story, at the end of the day this costume doesn't fit.
@Charlaine
ReplyDeleteIt's great having you as a reader. The more the merrier.
If you ever find yourself with the extra time, money, or just want some comics to read, just give me a holler. I know you're friends with Matt so he'd probably have a list of his own to get you started on, but I've got a couple of books that might interest you.
p.s. My sister could tell you stories about how crazy I am about having food, drinks, or dirty hands near my comics. :]
Arnab, can I just ask, have you read Wonder Woman 600 and the interview with JMS regarding it?
ReplyDeleteI am not particularly sure what that has to do with anything. But in any case, I have read Wonder Woman 600 and if the JMS interview you are referring to is the one included in the book, then I have read that as well.
ReplyDelete