Avatar photo


Name: Nicolas Henson



This was a well balanced issue. It gave us the secret atrocitus has said he knew about the blue lanterns,…

Read full review and comments

Is it just me or did this story just sort of come from around the corner from nowhere? its not…

Read full review and comments
Ion79's Recent Comments
March 27, 2009 3:16 pm

like i pointed out the men are objectified for diff. reasons, so yes the fullfill a diff function. was simply pointing out that if you think that men are not then think again.

but really there is no overt sexual objectification in comics, atleast the mainstream ones i read, anymore. mostly its just making gals look disproportionate, and that only becomes sexual if you find whatever it is overtly sexual and for the most part in order for this to fall inot any sort of negative objectification it usually has to be exploitative, this is definatly not that.  like for example if a female in a wheel chair undressing to take a shower and all you really see is how this act could be difficult, does it for you, you know turns you on, then yeah that is sexual but not in general. again these are fictional characters that aren't even being portrayed by real people,  if this were tv or movies.......eh.

but yeah i dont see what is so bad about this book i thought it was good.

 if someone thinks babs is out of character please elaborate so the rest of us can understand what you mean. again black canary asking babs if she can push her in the JLA book was not only out of character for black canary but illogical cus there are no handels on her wheechair to use to push. 

whats so wrong with puting a scene in that shows the difficulties she faces while contrasting it with her strenghts despite her disability? thats what this book was for me.

March 27, 2009 12:56 am

yeah I dont have a problem with this. I mean, we don't really see anything that we don't already see in other super hero gals when in costume. even if barb were stil wearing the bat cowl of hers, we could still imagine the same movements with what we see of her in a tight bat suit. and still know what each body part looks like.

and if you dont think that the men are objectified, then you have been listening to your feminist gal pals too much. cus they most definatley are, but they are for diff reasons. they are the muscualr oversexed men that alot of guys wish they gould be but never will be, and then its the fabio fantasy esque thing that some females are into but will never really have. even naturaly muscular (not body building competitiors) does not look like that and guys packages when in tights dont stand out like that. go see a ballet with a dude in it you will see my point. the dudes are objectified, they just dont show skin. its pretty much the same thing with their feminine counterparts. but they show skin. its fictional drawings, its really hard to objectify and exploit something that doesnt really exist. and if this is exploitative in nature then what are those romance novels besides trashy?

also, they are only sexualy objectified if, you find the imagery sexy or there is a sex act happening with no context like in a porno. barb undressing for a shower does not really objectify her, sure it may be a little racy but its only sexal objectification if A) the artist is intending that, and shows it via gratuitus scenes B) you are objectifing that imagery/girl all on your own C) it is exploitative. barb  was not being exploited, she was taking a shower and we saw no more of her butt or breasts tha we do if she were cloathed in costume or out.  basically did he draw anything that was gratuitus or not? there were no, i want to say campy, t and a seens except for the pose where we are in second life which was on purpose, its a comment on second life.

just because this artist is good at drawing erotica (i wouldnt know found that out from one of the posts above) does not mean you should look at everything he does with that bias, and sorry but it seems like alot of you are. i read this, reread it and i simply do not see what yall are talking about. 

now as far as babs not being babs idk, havent really followed too closely to be able to pick up on much. but that jla bit where black canary asks to push her is odd.....


just my view on the issue, thought why not through my two cents in I have nothin better to do right now. 


March 23, 2009 6:29 pm so why is bats on the cover? really tempted on this, gonna pull it and decide in store.
March 12, 2009 3:02 pm

I'm liking the hole thing with sodam and his mom that was good characterization but i think it took up too many pages. i was expecting more of a fight between mongul and arkillo  and how exactly did mongul win i mean one sec arkillo is standing there seaming victorious and then the next he just falls and isn't anymore....not sure what happened there. overall it was a solid issue but still thought the parts that were drawn out were done so a bit much and the other parts could have been drawn out more.

i think thats why i thought there was filler, the pacing was off for me. by like idk a page or so.

March 12, 2009 2:54 pm

@TNC: I would hope so but that seemed to be tim and the way they dew his head is really similar if not the same to how they drew the batmans head on the new batman  and robin cover. I wasn't so sure about tim in the bat costume at first either, i had to go back and really look at what was going on from panel to panel to get it. but i am pretty sure unless some how they explain that next issue. and that looked alot like azrael from what past encarnations of azrael have looked like.  I mean i can't think of anyone else it would be, and jason todd is for all we know no longer on this earth, we havent seen where he ended up post cisis yet, and i would be surprised to see him using guns.

thats just my take on the hole deal so far. 

March 11, 2009 7:28 pm it does appear to be tim in the batsuit in the middle, and it appears to be azrael in the end. and as far as  the answer to the big question, well if in fact that is tim in the batsuit in the middle, which i am pretty sure it is, then that plus the cover reveal for the new batman and robin gives the whole thing away.
March 11, 2009 7:20 pm i thought it was ok.
March 11, 2009 7:01 pm i didn't like this one as much it just sorta seemed like mostly filler and not enough of the main action, idk gonna look at it again later and see if i still feel that way.
March 11, 2009 1:02 am

Why do they leak these sort of things, just why?  I was all set to buy btfc but now i am going to wait for the trade. That buisiness with damien being robin just sort of spoiled it for me. idk maybe i will read it in shop or something... 

just dont really care for or like damian. eh....

March 11, 2009 12:39 am

@ wadewilson: worse than a dragons after eating onions and garlic I'd imagine. lol.


@ flakbait: oh, ok. that makes sense.