Pick of the Week Podcast
Show Notes
Another 13 12 books from DC, and another wad of comics from everyone else, and we’re still going to fit in as much as we can. This is the third week of new DC #1 issues, and we’re rating every one of them. One week to go! This show is either sexy or sexist, and we can’t tell, because it might be a script error. Let’s just get to it and get rating!
Total Running Time: 01:09:00
Pick of the Week:
00:01:20 – They did it! Wonder Woman #1 was a near perfect issue, and of course, it’s Pick of the Week.
The New 52 (Ratings):
00:11:06 – Another near perfect issue? Greg Capullo and Scott Snyder live up to the hype on Batman #1.
00:18:09 – Birds of Prey #1 was kind of fun. Who knew?
00:21:21 – Blue Beetle #1 was a lot more than it needed to be, and not enough at the same time.
00:23:09 – With some up and some down on Captain Atom #1, we all agree it had surprises.
00:26:10 – What a fun sexy time they’re having in Catwoman #1? Or is it?
00:30:22 – Let’s take 100 years to explore DC Universe Presents: Deadman #1, in order to reflect how reading it felt.
00:32:49 – Someone give these Lanterns a job in Green Lantern Corps #1.
00:34:40 – Introductions! Two names each! Kill us! Legion of Super-Heroes #1!
00:38:22 – We can’t agree on red or blue when talking about Nightwing #1.
00:40:37 – The opinions expressed on Red Hood and the Outlaws #1 do not necessarily reflect the opinions of iFanboy.com and its affiliates.
00:44:27 – Lots of action in that first issue of Supergirl #1!
Comics:
00:49:15 – She never loved you, Ron. But he loves X-Men: Schism #4.
00:53:20 – Ron can’t take the drama of the breakups in Uncanny X-Men #543.
00:54:17 – Is there any point to reading Game of Thrones #1?
00:55:22 – Crime drama lives in Near Death #1!
00:56:13 – Is Avengers: The Children’s Crusade #7 late? Conor doesn’t care.
User Reviews:
00:57:57 – The Top 5 Community Picks of the Week.
00:58:58 – Myncy is not wrong about Daredevil #4.
01:00:21 – ResurrectionFlan raves on Hulk #41.
E-Mail:
00:02:05 – Wes asks about what anthology comics we like. Tough question.
Brought to You By:
• The New York Comic-Con – October 13 – 16, 2011 at the Javits Center in NYC – Tons of comics and media guests! Don’t miss the last big comic con of 2011!
• Trigun Badlands Rumble from Funimation.
Music:
“Girl, You’ll Be a Woman Soon”
Urge Overkill
Subscribe
Get Involved
Doing the podcast is fun and all, but let's be honest, listening to the 2 of us talk to each other can get repetitive, so we look to you, the iFanboy listeners to participate in the podcast! "How can I get in on the fun?" you may ask yourself, well here's how:
- E-Mail us at contact@ifanboy.com with any questions, comments or anything that may be on your mind.
Please don't forget to leave your name and where you're writing from and each week, we'll pick the best e-mails to include on the podcast!
Find us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Subscribe to our RSS Feed
Some rights reserved.
Don’t know if you guys read it or not, but curious to know what you dudes thought of RED WING #3 ?
Still really enjoying it – wasn’t much more to say than that though – consistently awesome (in my opinion)
I still have general issues withe the comic portrayal of solely sexy women, as in you can be strong and sexy and go after what you want…but we only show Starfire and Catwoman cos thats what DUDES want. I gets that what sells and isn’t new but I’ve always had issues with it. But not wanting to stir that old pot of crazy stew again I liked alot of the books on sale this week and thought it was pretty good.
I saw lots of female characters in this month’s comics that were portrayed in empowered/interesting non-sexual ways.
They apply.
It doesn’t really matter what they do. Solo female superhero comic books don’t really sell well.
my only real issues is that people were pretending it was liberating. If they never said that and just said this is the same old, same old comics for wish-fulfillment and hadn’t bough it up as being feminist then no-one would care.
Any chance of the ifanboy store coming back soon? I’m working in Artist Alley during NYCC and would love to wear a ifanboy t-shirt during the con.
I have to disagree with Ron while at the same time admitting that I understand the point he is making about Catwoman. I thought that DC would use the reboot as a way to make these characters more broadly accessible. Batman #1 did a great job in shedding some of the baggage and grim-dark that we seen on Batman titles since Frank Miller. Catwoman #1 had the same opportunity to do that and instead they a dark, sex filled romp. It wasn’t awful but, as Ron himself said, it was the same Catwoman we’ve been reading for the past 20+ years.
Also, I hate the argument that because a woman sleeps around it makes her an empowered figure. It does not. Sex is a part of being human but over indulging in it does not make a strong, deep, fleshed out character.
Amanda Conner’s Power Girl was a strong, empowered (and sexy) character but she didn’t part her legs for every guy that came along.
Good points. I agree. I didn’t see Catwoman is strong and empowered. I felt she was simply a pawn of Winick’s to try and draw attention to his book. She actually came across as pretty trashy.
Truly empowered women show their power by chopping centaurs’ limbs off even though they have lassos right there on their hips.
Or truly empowered women crash land on Earth and completely house a platoon of mecha-soldiers.
Batman isn’t just “every guy.”
The disappointing thing is that Judd Winnick wrote Power Girl after the Palmiotti/Connor run and he didn’t turn her into a sexpot either. I guess something awesome like the Brubaker reboot is just too much to ask for.
Great podcast (as usual). Two comments:
Catwoman – I’m REALLY surprised at your takes on Catwoman. First, I have no problem with people being annoyed and put off by the heavy sexual content or the poor depiction of women. Those are legitimate gripes. Personally, I wasn’t offended by it but can clearly see how people could be. March and Winick’s idea of sexy is nothing more than pink bras, boob shots, and weird porn mag poses. Just looking at March’s cover tells you all you need to know (a stripping Catwoman with her cat suit unzipped pouring diamonds all over her cleavage while posing for a Hustler centerfold). But I was surprised that you guys didn’t hammer it for the structural problems. It was clunky, disjointed storytelling capped off by a sex scene that wasn’t offensive, it was simply out of the blue and felt disconnected from any hint of a cohesive story. I thought this was a mess.
Captain Atom – I thought this issue was a total mess. I thought the story was bland and lifeless. I said (somewhere) that at times it felt like a college nuclear physics lecture instead of a fun comic book. In terms of art, I’ve noticed you guys have an affection for hyper-stylized art. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with that. Art styles are strictly matters of preference. But I thought Williams’ work was flat and borderline ugly. This book just didn’t work for me on any level.
Anyway, those are my takes. They mean nothing but it’s fun to discuss.
I’m with you, Keith. Even if we take Winnick’s comments about Catwoman at face value (i.e. he wanted to create a sexy Catwoman book), he failed. It’s not sexy. It’s grotesque. And the story isn’t good enough for us to overlook that, at least not in this issue.
Agreed. The last page wasn’t sexy at all. It was disturbing. I don’t want to see superheroes engaged in coitus. Seriously. I guess I have a different definition of sexy than Judd Winnick.
I really wanted to like this book. I like the Bat-books and like the idea of Catwoman. I went to college with Judd. Didn’t know him, but read his Nuts & Bolts strip in the Michigan Daily and loved it. I haven’t read a lot of his comic work and never read a Catwoman book before this one. Sorry to say that I won’t be buying issue 2.
Ratings.
Ratings!
As far as Catwoman and Starfire…i just don’t want to see DC books turning into Zennoscope books, which is the red flag that was raised for me. There are already publishers doing T&A superhero books…no need for DC to go down that path. Its the wrong direction for them IMO, and i think it will push more people away (especially new readers) than bring in.
Please take these comics more towards a true all ages place instead of a pervy guy in his basement place.
Very well said. One reviewer I read said this book was something he would like as a 13 year old kid. Then he would promptly hide it under his matress so his parents wouldn’t trash it. Both Catwoman and Red Hood felt cheap and neither did anything for me.
@Keith, My take has been that just because you are writing a book to appeal to 13 year old boys, it does not mean you have to write it as if you were a 13 year old boy yourself. At the end of the day, I think Josh said it best, it was really just boring.
@nudebuddha, Hard to disagree with ya.
They should have just painted the cover art and the splash page of Catwoman frenching the Batman on either side of an old Dodge van. It could have pink shag carpeting and black pompoms and a horn that plays ‘Witchy Woman’.
Am I the only one who hears “project Omaha” and thinks Lady Fanny of Omaha? Probably
THANK GOD! SOMEONE IN COMICS WHO ISN’T ACTING ALL HIGH-HORSE AND OFFENDED BY RED HOOD AND CATWOMAN! Seriously, I can’t say how much i appreciate your level-headed reviews sometimes. Even when I don’t agree with you, I.E. Fear Itself, I respect your opinions enough. Same goes for the posters here. The best discussions and most reasonable posts anywhere on the net. I’m proud to be apart of this. THANK YOU!
I’m really surprised no one had a problem with the ending of Catwoman on this show.
Writers from before the relaunch, mostly Paul Dini actually, didn’t work hard for years to get Catwoman away from the sexpot that she used to be. Before the relaunch she seemed to be a strong willed, no nonsense leader for ‘Sirens’ or in general. Now Winick just wrote her to be a whore at the end of the issue.
Maybe it wasn’t as terrible as Starfire but man, Winick totally missed the point of the character in the first issue. She’s already back to the Michelle Pfeiffer era of Catwoman which was a dark period for the character in my mind.
I ment ‘DID work hard’ in my last post. Damn you lack of edit button!
I think you’re 100% correct. This isn’t a Catwoman that’s strong and complex. She’s not even a Catwoman I could really care about.
She’s just reads like another superhero who happens to be a female and thus must have tons of sex with a male because that’s what females do apparently in the comic world.
But hey, 99% of the industry, fans, and critics hated this portrayal so the majority is on the negative side for this topic.
Well said, Champ.
The fact that Winnick made Catwoman a sexually active character isn’t really the problem. And I think the guys are seriously misreading the public criticism of these books when they say it’s an uproar about her being sexual. It’s not. That’s what Winnick would like us to believe because it makes his critics seem like annoying prudes. The problem is that, of all the ways they could have introduced the new Catwoman and Starfire, in their first issues in a totally new universe, they chose to show them as sex objects. There needs to be dramatic context for the sex so it isn’t gratuitous and objectifying — the comparison with Silk Spectre/Nite-Owl in Watchmen doesn’t work, because we got to see them do other things before the sex scene in Watchmen that helped to illustrate their reasons for wanting to sleep together.
The moment Ron made the comment on having sex in their costumes, I knew immediately he (and the other guys) totally missed the point of the criticism. You’re also dead on with the bad Watchmen comparison because they are two completely different uses of sex in a comic. One is about how two people, who figure out they love each other, finally are able to explore their desires in one moment of pure love. The other is just a random drop in from a character and Catwoman IMMEDIATELY pounces on him and does the deed. Where they got the idea that it’s similar I have no idea.
You said it much better then I did. There is no problem with having a sexually active character. But to go right for the sex in the first issue for no particular reason IS the problem.
If Paul Dini wrote this issue he would’ve had Batman and Catwoman talk about the incident on her apartment, maybe kiss once or twice, and then write his way out of them having sex. Because you don’t need to have sex or any implication of it to sell the scene. Batman was concern that his on again/off again friend was almost killed, which should’ve been the emotional drive to end the issue. Not just go for the ‘kill’ and make a bad double entendre about making him ‘come’ early.
Again the fact that all three of these guys completely and utterly missed the point of the criticism baffles me.
TNC, so much outrage, so much indignation. I can’t believe you’re baffled again!!! Why doesn’t everyone just ascribe to your myopic world view?!!!!
Here’s what the iFanboys’ point of view about the Catwoman comic was: whatever. they were saying the discussion about an adult female character having sex was stupid.
@edward, while the discussion about a female adult character having sex because she chooses may be a “stupid,” and I don’t think that’s the issue with the criticism that has been placed on this book, as well as Red Hood and the Outlaws, the criticism that @TNC and others have had with these books is the way that these women have been drawn and what the artists “camera” has decided to show/excenuate/highlight.
I’m sorry Josh, Ron and Conor, but i was surprised/diassapointed that you missed/didn’t discuss the way these women were drawing in relation to them being sexy. The trouble I had with Catwoman and Starfire were the way they were drawn, not necessarily their actions.
I think it’s hard to judge at this point what the context is. In this new 52, this may be a regular occurrence and not just a “random drop-in”. If, say, Batman Inc. isn’t entirely ret-conned, then this isn’t the first time, just the most graphic time. Likewise, the chemistry has always been there, so it shouldn’t come as a shock. Finally, considering his history, I’d have a hard time believing Winnick is writing a story that glorifies consequence-free promiscuity; if she’s shagging everything that walks on two legs, hopefully it will lead to unintended consequences. It probably won’t happen every issue either.
The Watchmen reference isn’t a very apt one, as this has a very different tone. You wouldn’t score this scene with “Hallelujah.” Bass line and synthesizer, maybe some sax or horn.
BTW, in Batman #1, there was a point during Bruce’s speech where Capullo focused on specific characters relevant to his life and story. One of them was a brunette. Was that supposed to be Selina or was that someone else?
@TNC–you’ll make a bigger statement by not buying issue #2. Lets see if we as comics fans put our money where are opinions are.
WeeklyRoll: so we agree that it’s stupid to moan about an adult female character having sex. it’s also equally as stupid to complain about Catwoman being sexualized after 70 years of that characterisation
Edward: I agree that moaning and groaning about Catwoman having sex and being sexualized is stupid. However, in the context of this first issue of Catwoman, was it the best way to introduce a character? maybe not. Was she too sexual? maybe, depending on your taste. The guys didn’t seem to mind her being that sexual, and as Josh put it below that this can be par for the course for american comics.
It all comes down to how catwoman and starfire are viewed, that is drawn and shown to the “camera, ” which we see. and to me that’s the problem, especially because this is an introduction to the character. I have nothing wrong with sex being depicited in the media, but like violence can be over the top, so too can sex, and that last page of catwoman to me is a pose that you can find in pornography.
Great reviews. You guys hit the nail right on the head. Some people took the whole Catwoman and Red Hood thing went the different way with it. Everyone knows that Selina and Bruce have a sexual relationship and given the events that happened in the book. How could you not see this coming. The problem people had with it was the final page. FINALLY some reviewers who just took it as face value and let it be what it really is. Two fictional adults having fictional sex in a FICTIONAL WORLD! Again great job.
Also I think you guys were being unfair to the Legion book. Okay, so there’s a lot of characters and they have ridiculous names, that doesn’t make it a bad book. Ron, of all people who read X-Men, shouldn’t be complaining on the amount of characters in a comic at a given time.
Is a Legion book my cup of tea? No. But I wouldn’t base my entire argument on liking or disliking a book just because of characters and their names.
You know what it felt like? It felt like listening to 3 seniors who didn’t know what was going on in a movie.
“Who is that?”
“Why are they talking?”
yeah, come on, lets not criticize these comics on a comic criticism podcast
Maybe you should sit out the next few plays, Champ.
@Wheelhands Okay you do see that I’m not the only one with this opinion right? Why don’t you tell them to ‘leave for a few plays’ and be a jerk to them too.
More then a good portion of fans, critics, and even comic creators were not fond of this issue so again…Either tell EVERYONE to calm down or don’t single me out because you think you can get away with it.
I’ll step up. I agree with Champ. It’s hard to find a crack in his argument. This was a poorly executed issue and poorly thought out approach to a classic character. Nothing remotely sexy about. Silly and absurd maybe…but not sexy.
I was using an Anchorman quote to suggest that perhaps you should skip the next podcast or two. You’re clearly not enjoying them. But honestly I think that you probably DO enjoy them, you’ve just declared yourself the defender of fictional women’s rights and the argument has gotten away from you. You’re not defending your point anymore. You’re defending yourself.
My comment was a joke, dude. Take a Valium. And I CAN get away with it. I just did. As long as we all stick to the terms and conditions, we can “get away” with whatever we want. It’s the Internet. You’re allowed to post your opinions, and I’m allowed to comment on how ridiculous and argumentative I think you’re being. It’s a beautiful thing.
Love what Ron says about Catwoman. Of course they screw with the costumes on.
great show. glad to see that supergirl came through for y’all . thanks
I can respond for my own part in that, I’m sorry I’m not as upset as people seem to think I should be. It was silly more than anything, and nothing I haven’t seen many, many, many times before. The fact is, I’m not gonna keep reading either Red Hood or Catwoman, because I’m not interested in them, for whatever reason. Same net result.
By the way, although I do not necessarily agree completely with your take on Blue Beetle, I want to thank you for pointing out the problems with the Latin stereotypes and language. It’s interesting because Bedard is Puerto Rican and as a Hispanic (Cuban) myself I did not necessarily take issue with the language, until I learned that in Texas it’s not referred to as Spanglish, it’s called Tex-Mex. It just goes to show that “Hispanic” or “Latino” is a pretty wide umbrella to put things under.
Huge umbrella.
@josh: I’m completely fine with you or anyone not having a problem with it because it’s your opinion.
It’s just that it was clear as day that all three of you guys completely missed THE POINT of the criticism. It’s true, this isn’t the first time this has ever happened in a comic, so it shouldn’t be that shocking in the long run. But the way she was portrayed and the way Winick handled it is what the problem is for most people.
If you have a back issue of a Paul Dini ‘Detective Comics’ issue I say read that and then re-read Catwoman #1 because that’s where you see the shocking misinterpretation of the character.
I couldn’t care less how Catwoman is interpreted.
@josh: So you’re perfectly fine with how she is in this issue?
That seems very strange not to care.
TNC: answer this completely honestly, do you really care how Catwoman is handled or are you arguing for the sake of arguing ?
I care because this is going to be a lot of people’s first take on the character outside of film, tv, and any other media. People are just going to think she’s just a sexpot which she totally isn’t.
Again Paul Dini and a lot of other writers took a lot of time to take her away from the original notions of her which Winick brought back. She’s a much deeper character then a lot of people give her credit for. But if no one seems to care, like Josh, on this interpretation then she’s gonna be doomed to be a horny superhero until this book is taken over by another writer.
again with the outrage, it’s a catwoman comic. keep it in perspective. go get involved in local politics or volunteer work if you feel the need to discuss the inequities of the world.
or better yet talk to girl instead of complaining how they’re portrayed in comics on the internet
How does having sex with one person, Batman, make her a sexpot? It’s freaking Batman. I know this may come as a shock to you but adults do have pre-marital sex. I know. It’s scary.
The inference that Winnick wants you to make is that they are going to have sex. They didnt’ actually have sex in the issue. I had no issue with Catwoman’s portrayal. The ending was actually spot on. Catwoman was vunerable; her place was just destroyed; and just in the nick of time, the object of her affection shows up to comfort her. Is that wrong? No. Does that make her a “sexpot”? No.
It’s amazing to me just how many people are uptight about sex or anything sexy being depicted in ther comics. It’s utterly shocking.
@TNC correct me If I’m wrong you always hated SIrens, claimed it was cheesecake, but now your making your argument based upon Catwoman’s depiction in Sirens. Again, a book you hated, and probably never read, but will now claim you did.
If you’ve listened to the podcast for any period of time, you will know the guys belief system, and the fact that they aren’t up in arms about Catwoman should come as no suprise. I know you want them to be as upset as you, but all the arguing isn’t going to change it.
@Josh: you are totally entitled to your own opinion and that is fine. I don’t think anyone here is trying to attack you personally.
But, as you said, this portrayal of Catwoman is one we’ve seen many, many times. And this reboot would have been a great opportunity for DC to shed the dungeon dwelling, mouth breather stereotype of comic readers by slightly tweaking it’s characters. Instead they continued to give us the same Catwoman we’ve been reading for the past few years which only reinforces outside opinions about the comics community.
@RocketRaccon: I didn’t like Sirens for the ART more then anything else. Dini did a good job with the characters, but March (surprise surprise) had no problems giving us shots of panty lines, cleavage shots, and anything else to show their bodies instead of laying out a good comic. So again it was the art I had a problem with and not the writing.
what’s at the end of all this? are you just waiting for Josh or one of the iFanboys to breakdown and tell you you’re right and they’re wrong? is that it?
Great show as alwasy but Regarding Capullo:
I love his superhero drawings (for the most part) but when he draws every day people and faces, and unmasked heroes in general- his style just grates on me.
I remember how annoying macfarlane got, and this pretender came along and essentually reproduced the most annoying aspects of Macfarlane.
For me, this issue was me trying to get into the story while trying to avert my eyes from the goofy over stylized faces. a sort of out of sight out of mind experience.
I will admit he had a good support team of colorists and inkers to make it almost palatable, but all in all I find capullo to be only a level or two above liefield for over stylized muck.
I danced when mac stopped drawing, and I will do the same for greg.
Two of the more interesting pieces on the Catwoman/Red Hood stuff:
http://www.comicsalliance.com/2011/09/22/starfire-catwoman-sex-superheroine/
http://itswalky.tumblr.com/post/10676670525
Disliking Catwoman #1 because it’s an inaccurate/inconsistent characterization is ridiculous.
Disliking it because of its representation of women is a more important discussion, I think.
I agree the whole thing has been blown out of proportion, but there is still a solid core to the whole thing.
ugh that laura chick is obnoxious. her little article was one long SPECIOUS rant.
PLEASE dont ever have her on the show guys.
Hi iFanboys,
I can understand your frustrations with Legion of Superheroes. I’m a long-time Legionaire fan but I even I had to drop the title ages ago after the relaunch in 2004. However LOSH years ago was a great title! The best run was Mark Waid’ and Tom McGraw’s 1994-2000 run and Abnett and Lanning’s run (2000-2004). The 1994 Zero Hour launch is a good primer for new readers because they did a good job re-introducing the characters and the writing/art were superb. If you’re puzzled why there are so many LOSH, give that 10-year run a chance.
If I had started reading X-Men in the early 2000’s without reading the earlier 70-80’s run, I probably wouldn’t think anything of the series. But if I were to introduce X-Men to a new reader, I would start with the Claremont/Byrne and Claremont/Romita run not the new stuff (even though the X-books had gotten better).
Don’t base Legion of Superheroes by the crap in the recent years but from the storylines that made them great.
@chinochang Very well said. The Legion oF Super-Heroes has a very long past, and there have been many excellent stories told. “The Great Darkness Saga” in the 80’s comes to mind, as well as the Waid/McGraw and Abentt / Lanning runs you mentioned.
When I listened to the podcast today, I was a little shocked by how patronizing the guys were to the Legion (and its fans ) as a whole. Yes, recent re-boots have not been good, but to say “there are too many characters” and ridicule the character code-names was very unfair.
Yes, of course everyone is entitled to their opinions. Yes, you can hate /dislike/not care about the Legion concept, but to disparage it as a whole was just unnecessary.
Also, I have been a fan of the X-Men, but you can’t convince me that their storied history, sheer number of characters, crazy plot twists, and code-names aren’t just as daunting as the Legion’s. They just enjoy more popularity.
As a comic fan of over 30 years, I can say this: It has been YEARS since the Legion enjoyed much popularity. But all that can change in the right hands. The Legion’s time for resurgence just hasn’t arrived – yet.
These are jokes.
And in their defense, there’s a metric shit ton of characters, and some of them have silly code names.
But in all seriousness, Legion seems like one of those line in the sand comics. You either love it or hate it, you don’t really hear someone saying they randomly picked up an issue to see what’s going on. At least it doesn’t seem that way.
I think the BIGGEST difference between the x-men and the legion is the fact that its set in the future. It’s that one additional point of unfamiliarity that helps future confuse new readers over the x-men (which at it’s core, has a very relateable premise that the Legion just doesn’t have)
i’ve wanted to try the Legion for a while, but realize it will require tons of homework that i just don’t have time for. I’ll read em when they pop up in the Supes books.
Legion strikes me as the exact opposite intention of the reboot.
I commend the iFanboys for at least giving Legion of Superheroes a chance. I just don’t want them to dismiss it because of the recent LOSH run, which isn’t really good. I’ve mentioned the Zero Hour relaunch because it’s a very good starting point and if you love Guardians of the Galaxy you will love that run.
As for Wonder Woman, did Conor ever read the George Perez run back in the 80’s? That’s the run that got me interested in the character and it’s been decades since I’ve been fond of WW after Perez left the title.
I loved Capullo’s art. The detail (and re-readability) reminded me of Bolland in The Killing Joke. There also seems to be a Craig P Russell aspect to his art.. (there’s also a bit of Finch).
Thiis comment thread is epic. My two cents: sex sells and DC wants to sell comic books. You dont like it, dont read it. Get over it
Hmmm, since the general public ISN’T buying and reading comic books (hence DC’s reboot), mainstream comic publishers will need to continue to expand beyond the ‘sex sells’ m.o. if they truly want to recruit casual male and female readers. Just saying.
As a male, I can’t comment on whether or not these stories objectify women, or rather empower them. I really believe you don’t know what makes a woman feel empowered unless you are a women, and vice versa. If you’re a man and you’re making claims that certain things are empowering women or not, you end up with feet in your mouth. It’s like a male being very pro life or pro choice, at the end of the day you’re ultimately the one who has to go through the process. Mentioning that this has been a thing thats been around for the past 20 years in comics kind of just sounds like DC isn’t really moving forward on all fronts.
If you remember when Roger Ebert reviewed Blue Velvet, he claimed David Lynch exploited and degraded Isabella Rossalini, he couldn’t have been more wrong, because she would say differently. Its not his place to make those statements, and as a trio of male comic readers, I don’t think you know whats empowering or not for a woman. Leave that for female readers.
My opinion anyway. That being said, the stories weren’t good. Otherwise, keep up the good work!
Word up.
Excellent show gentlemen! I personally gave pick of the week to Catwoman, knocked that one out of the park for me, really nailed the voice and world of that character in an entertaining addictive way. Wonder Woman also awesome.