Not signed in (Sign In)
    •  
      CommentAuthorMike Wolfer
    • CommentTimeAug 30th 2011 edited
     (10186.1)
    Let me cautiously wade ankle-deep into Whitechapel to see how warm the waters are with regard to WAR GODDESS.

    I'm that Mike, who's been working with Warren on GRAVEL all these years, a series that's quite a thematic departure from Boundless Comics' balls-out (or is it boobs-out?) "bad girl"/retro/rock 'em sock 'em revamp series WAR GODDESS. Issue #0 has been on the shelves for a few weeks, and this Wednesday sees the release of #1.

    Is anyone here reading the book, and if so, any thoughts or comments? I'm freaking loving writing the series, as it harkens back to my roots on the self-published book WIDOW (who appears in all her spider-leggy glory in WG after a hiatus of about 10 years). After attending the Baltimore Comic Con, I've met one segment of the comic market who have embraced the book almost uncomfortably at times, but I'm curious what the cultured Whitechapel crowd has to say.

    Have at it.

    wargoddess #1
    •  
      CommentAuthorBeamish
    • CommentTimeAug 30th 2011
     (10186.2)
    I missed 0 but would be happy to check it out and let you know. Enjoyed Wolfskin btw.
    •  
      CommentAuthoroldhat
    • CommentTimeAug 30th 2011 edited
     (10186.3)
    I'm just going to PUT THIS LINK HERE and step away before venom comes out of my mouth.
  1.  (10186.4)
    I feel it is necessary to post a link to this fine and educational tumblr page.
    •  
      CommentAuthorglukkake
    • CommentTimeAug 30th 2011
     (10186.5)
    Erm, I'll be the one to outright say it.
    You've hit the pinnacle of alienating women from comics with having heavily sexualized women in impractical clothing cat fighting each other and then calling them "girls".

    Maybe the storyline is much better than the cover would have me think or maybe it veers into ridiculous camp that makes it all funny (and maybe there's equal opportunity of men in similar situations!) but from what I've seen, this comic isn't meant for people like me.
    •  
      CommentAuthoroldhat
    • CommentTimeAug 30th 2011 edited
     (10186.6)
    Yeah, and that's it with me too. Really, just by the cover of this comic, as a female I'm not feeling too inclined to check it out.
    • CommentAuthorRenThing
    • CommentTimeAug 30th 2011
     (10186.7)
    Sorry, Mike, but I don't think that's the comic for me.

    @oldhat

    As a male I'm not feeling inclined to check it out.
  2.  (10186.8)
    I have my own thoughts on how the characters are dressed; in fact, I specifically address it in the script. I appreciate the comments based solely on the cover I linked above.

    However.

    Back to my original question:

    "Is anyone here reading the book, and if so, any thoughts or comments?"
    •  
      CommentAuthoroldhat
    • CommentTimeAug 30th 2011 edited
     (10186.9)
    And what are those thoughts? I know you're asking a specific question and don't want to deviate from it, but this IS a discussion about your comic and something I'm wondering about.

    To be clear, this isn't bashing your writing on it. I haven't read any of it because I just heard about it today and haven't seen a preview of it.

    EDIT: Nevermind, found a preview. Huh.
    • CommentAuthorRenThing
    • CommentTimeAug 30th 2011
     (10186.10)
    ...Huh...
  3.  (10186.11)
    Ha. I can't really say much. I posted like four Frank Thorne pages on my tumblr today, and am a big fan of stuff like Red Sonja and Wonder Woman.
    I don't really mind scantily clad women in comics or art, so long as they are doing something cool, or look really cool, and aren't being demeaned consistently within the pages.

    I'm not overly interested in this, just because I'm more pulled to extremes when it comes to art or coloring styles, and this doesn't really do it for me. If this same comic were drawn by like Ashley Wood or Paul Pope or Brandon Graham, I would probably be all over it.
    •  
      CommentAuthorMike Wolfer
    • CommentTimeAug 30th 2011 edited
     (10186.12)
    I was just going to point the direction to the preview, but you beat me to it. If you want to see leather, that's cool. But what you're seeing is either a nylon flight suit, cotton-based capris or who-knows-what-they are on a villainess who can control fire.

    But it's not the desert. It's the mountains of Bolivia (as it says on the page).

    As for my thoughts, like I said, it's in the script, so I don't want to give away any punchlines, but wardrobes do change depending on environmental conditions, and if someone is dressed like a street-walker, she's going to get called out on it by someone. Just as you have! :)
    •  
      CommentAuthoroldhat
    • CommentTimeAug 30th 2011
     (10186.13)
    Yeah, I recognized the error, which is why I took it out. My bad on that. Working with a very tiny monitor and didn't notice the location!

    Still, I have to say that the art is just pushing me away from this.
  4.  (10186.14)
    Mike, I am reminded of a panel in BLACK SUMMER, in which a female character is shot in the leg, and artist Juan Jose Ryp did everything he could to put her in a pose that made her ass stick out sexily while her calf exploded. Not to mention X-MEN XENOGENESIS, in which artist Kaare Andrews basically turned Emma Frost's tits into a subplot.

    From what I've seen in the preview, and especially on the cover, WAR GODDESS seems to suffer from the same lack of sync between writer and artist (I am basing this solely on the writing of the preview, although you seem to be in accordance with the artist's approach, judging from your first post in this thread). The cover alone might as well be pushing me away physically. On a technical level the artist is talented but his visual narrative seems entirely built around the preposterously-dressed body of the female characters. And while the writing seems far above the level the cover promises, cliche lines like "Go join her in hell" do not attract me.

    Which is why I have to join others in saying that what I've seen of this book isn't for me. I know you are asking for the opinion of people who have read the whole book, but I share other users' urge to point out the problems I can see so far, particularly regarding the artist's approach.
  5.  (10186.15)
    @Mike - I guess I'd have to ask you who your intended audience is/what sort of themes are you intending to address? There is definitely a market for a book with highly sexualized female characters kicking ass. If that is your market and those are your themes, it looks like you're probably spot on. I'm not sure that "the cultured Whitechapel crowd" is a haven for people who are fans of that type of comic, hence the generally negative reaction. If you're going for something else, I have to agree that your artist isn't doing you any favors. If I see this in the store, I'd consider picking it up just because you stopped by and asked for my thoughts, but I'll be honest that the preview has me convinced you have an uphill battle if you're looking to sell me more.
    •  
      CommentAuthorJay Kay
    • CommentTimeAug 30th 2011
     (10186.16)
    I wonder if this is the only cover that's coming out for this issue, and if that might have been a bad call.

    From what I understand, this is a revamp of an old character, right? It reminds me of recent revamps of characters like Witchblade, where while they often have a lot of different variant covers by different pin-up artists drawing her in the original bikini costume, in the actual comic and the official covers, she wears a full-set of armor which, while clinging to her skin and still showing off curves and some covers showing off cleavage, it at least seems more practical. In a place like this, it might have been better to lead out with something like that, or at least mentioning that there's more to your character than just catfights.

    I'm sorry for not actually talking about the book--I honestly never even heard of it until I saw this thread. The preview doesn't look bad, so I might keep an eye out for it if I ever have any extra money around.
  6.  (10186.17)
    I wonder, Jay Kay...

    wg #0
    wg#4
  7.  (10186.18)
    That wraparound cover >>>>>
    •  
      CommentAuthorJay Kay
    • CommentTimeAug 30th 2011
     (10186.19)
    Yeah, if it were me, I would have started with the wrap-around cover. Don't get me wrong, as a red-blooded American male I can dig two girls in bikinis fighting, but a badass woman about to fight a big monster with a whole lot of flipped over cars is always going to top it for me, IMO.
  8.  (10186.20)
    Yeah, this has motivated me to drop some money on the first comic with characters that look more like this that I see tomorrow, because apparently creators still don't feel it's safe to dress up female characters in things that look awesome (and take more effort to draw). PS, respectfully, in the preview page there how come I can see the spine and the cleavage of the blue shirt girl at the same time? Is it... mirrors?

    I have no problem with a comic that deals with sex and eroticism in any context, if it has something intelligent to say about it. Look at (the amazing) Lucille. That book starts off like Page 1: A girl is standing, Page 2: She took off her clothes is masturbating now. But it is a really really intense and affecting work! Further, it has nothing to apologize for. The characters don't need to discuss with each other why they go to their rooms and masturbate at night. We know why! It's because they want sex. A book with fighting girls wearing straps of cloth has a lot of explaining to do in terms of absurd visual propositions, and I'm probably not going to give it that chance.

    Generally, something that treats sex as a subject and not a lens through which completely asexual issues are presented, wouldn't have a cover like this. If you have written this comic to have a discussion of sex in it, I think that cover is still pretty confusin'.

    I don't want the art I consume to be prudish. I like sex. Sex is something that happens between two or more people having a relationship or dealing with horniness mutually; if a story isn't about that type of relationship or about horniness as an experience, then to put sex in it will probably blow up the story. It is dangerous to sexualize art when sex is not the subject. Obviously in comics and manga it is done all the time anyway by default, but I think you have to avoid exceeding the "I can ignore it" threshold of the readers who are more interested in the story, because for that group to read or buy it implies you convinced them that focus and effort went into presenting the 'real' comic. Very specifically, from the preview pages, I don't think the artist for the comic we are discussing is putting much effort into presentation. See spinecleavage-gate above.

    If you had led with the wraparound I think there would still be some disappointment from this community on the preview. But as far as just the covers, I don't really like any of them (the monster in two is great but how many remakes of Wonder Woman's costume do I need to see in my life?) I don't want to try to be too specific about what the creator should put on their cover, because obviously when you get down to any specific action it might or might not be something that turns a reader off. There are lots of different expectation avenues that lead a reader to be looking at a cover in the first place, and there are lots of different readers. Clearly, lots of readers will buy sexualized images that are not 'about' sex (because what if the internet ceased to exist on the ten minute drive home?! You wouldn't want to have to make a return trip). In some contexts a sexualized cover isn't going to turn me off. If I am looking for something new from Japan I know I have to be willing move past a turn-off cover ("fffffuck a skinny girl with those insane types of boobs would just be scary in real life, but lets see what the first page is like" would be the thought process), because that's the only type of covers they tend to have; from an English-language work where I haven't already started dropping cash on previous issues I am going to refer back to my rule paragraph three of this comment.

    Still looking forward to your work in general, Mr Wolfer.