RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,895
Posts: 5,476,959
Members: 25,050
Currently online: 488
Newest member: aloraptor

TrekToday headlines

Klingon Bloodwine To Debut
By: T'Bonz on Nov 25

Trek Actors In War Of The Worlds Fundraiser
By: T'Bonz on Nov 25

Star Trek: The Next Generation Gag Reel Tease
By: T'Bonz on Nov 24

Shatner In Haven
By: T'Bonz on Nov 24

Retro Review: Covenant
By: Michelle on Nov 22

Two Official Starships Collection Previews
By: T'Bonz on Nov 21

Saldana: Women Issues In Hollywood
By: T'Bonz on Nov 21

Shatner Book Kickstarter
By: T'Bonz on Nov 20

Trek Original Series Slippers
By: T'Bonz on Nov 19

Hemsworth Is Sexiest Man Alive
By: T'Bonz on Nov 19


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > Science Fiction & Fantasy

Science Fiction & Fantasy Farscape, Babylon 5, Star Wars, Firefly, vampires, genre books and film.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 25 2011, 01:39 AM   #871
theenglish
Rear Admiral
 
theenglish's Avatar
 
Location: Suriname
Re: DC's New 52: Reviews and Discussion (Spoilers welcolme and likely)

The big problem here is that so few comic book writers seem to be able to actually write women characters very well. That and the blatant sexism and subjugation still present in stories and (especially) art is embarrassing to say the least.

If they want new readers, get some real stories for and about women that are respectful and have depth!
theenglish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2011, 02:00 AM   #872
Myasishchev
Rear Admiral
 
Myasishchev's Avatar
 
Location: America after the rain
Re: DC's New 52: Reviews and Discussion (Spoilers welcolme and likely)

theenglish wrote: View Post
The big problem here is that so few comic book writers seem to be able to actually write women characters very well. That and the blatant sexism and subjugation still present in stories and (especially) art is embarrassing to say the least.

If they want new readers, get some real stories for and about women that are respectful and have depth!
Well, that'll happen when your work environment is something like 95% male, and your editorial staff has little to no interest in or capability of providing a framework to interpret your own work, at least more deeply than a facile rating system that is more reasoning from a conclusion than an actual rubric. Animal Man is M so that means it must be more offensive than Red Hood, right?
__________________

Myasishchev is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2011, 02:42 AM   #873
Trekker4747
Trekker4747
 
Trekker4747's Avatar
 
Location: Kansas City
Re: DC's New 52: Reviews and Discussion (Spoilers welcolme and likely)

Dennis wrote: View Post
Trekker4747 wrote: View Post
Dennis wrote: View Post
IMAO it's becoming clear (duh) that the shift to the nuDC is designed to include more explicitly sexual narrative and more graphic violence in many titles than was previously editorial policy. What remains to be seen is who among the creative staff are up to handling it particularly well.

And I guess there are three potential cheesy puns in that last sentence, none of which were intentional - but fuck it.
Fredric Wertham is spinning in his grave.
Let's wire up his corpse and see if we can generate some electrical power.
Conduction of the Ignorant.
Trekker4747 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2011, 03:46 AM   #874
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: DC's New 52: Reviews and Discussion (Spoilers welcolme and likely)

theenglish wrote: View Post
If they want new readers, get some real stories for and about women that are respectful and have depth!
Of course. That's the way Hollywood does it, right?


Myasishchev wrote: View Post
theenglish wrote: View Post
The big problem here is that so few comic book writers seem to be able to actually write women characters very well. That and the blatant sexism and subjugation still present in stories and (especially) art is embarrassing to say the least.

If they want new readers, get some real stories for and about women that are respectful and have depth!
Well, that'll happen when your work environment is something like 95% male, and your editorial staff has little to no interest in or capability of providing a framework to interpret your own work, at least more deeply than a facile rating system that is more reasoning from a conclusion than an actual rubric. Animal Man is M so that means it must be more offensive than Red Hood, right?
Besides that, though, we're talking about essentially the same kind of "blatant sexism" that drives storytelling and casting in most hughly successful summer blockbusters, action movies and a good chunk of television - not excluding most science fiction fare. So the notion that DC embracing this kind of thing represents some kind of retrograde movement against the tide of progress in popular art would be a hard sell - the question is whether these people are so clumsy in the process that they make themselves ridiculous.

Trekker4747 wrote: View Post
Conduction of the Ignorant.
Good one.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2011, 04:02 AM   #875
Myasishchev
Rear Admiral
 
Myasishchev's Avatar
 
Location: America after the rain
Re: DC's New 52: Reviews and Discussion (Spoilers welcolme and likely)

Dennis wrote: View Post
Myasishchev wrote: View Post
Well, that'll happen when your work environment is something like 95% male, and your editorial staff has little to no interest in or capability of providing a framework to interpret your own work, at least more deeply than a facile rating system that is more reasoning from a conclusion than an actual rubric. Animal Man is M so that means it must be more offensive than Red Hood, right?
Besides that, though, we're talking about essentially the same kind of "blatant sexism" that drives storytelling and casting in most hughly successful summer blockbusters, action movies and a good chunk of television - not excluding most science fiction fare. So the notion that DC embracing this kind of thing represents some kind of retrograde movement against the tide of progress in popular art would be a hard sell - the question is whether these people are so clumsy in the process that they make themselves ridiculous.
I dunno. People got upset over Transformers (and, contrawise, Twilight is a joke too, but at least has less baggage attached). And Star Trek, God. Least sexy sex appeal ever. So people give 'em shit when filmed work is clumsy, too, even when it's successful.

And yeah, I don't think they're actively evil, just clumsy. Real clumsy.

I think comics get less of a pass too because at least when films objectify someone, there's still the fundamental advantage that it's a real person being filmed, a person with their own agency who contracted to be objectified; this knowledge, and the constraints of physicality, mitigate how bad a movie can be.

By contrast, comics present representations completely sprung out of a writer and artist's imagination, and too often they come right out of the id without getting mediated by anything remotely resembling an ego, let alone a super-ego, or even something as basic to craft as anatomical accuracy, panel-to-panel continuity, or true aesthetic appeal. Thus Ed Benes and the cracked spines of a thousand fictional women. Thus Greg Land and a pattern of serious copyright violation. Thus Gillem March and a comic that is essentially a Viewmaster programmed for the male gaze.

The freedom to pose and block characters given to the comic creator is also a responsibility.

Oh, God, I sound like a libertarian.
__________________


Last edited by Myasishchev; September 25 2011 at 04:18 AM.
Myasishchev is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2011, 04:44 AM   #876
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: DC's New 52: Reviews and Discussion (Spoilers welcolme and likely)

Myasishchev wrote: View Post
Dennis wrote: View Post
Myasishchev wrote: View Post
Well, that'll happen when your work environment is something like 95% male, and your editorial staff has little to no interest in or capability of providing a framework to interpret your own work, at least more deeply than a facile rating system that is more reasoning from a conclusion than an actual rubric. Animal Man is M so that means it must be more offensive than Red Hood, right?
Besides that, though, we're talking about essentially the same kind of "blatant sexism" that drives storytelling and casting in most hughly successful summer blockbusters, action movies and a good chunk of television - not excluding most science fiction fare. So the notion that DC embracing this kind of thing represents some kind of retrograde movement against the tide of progress in popular art would be a hard sell - the question is whether these people are so clumsy in the process that they make themselves ridiculous.
I dunno. People got upset over Transformers (and, contrawise, Twilight is a joke too, but at least has less baggage attached). And Star Trek, God. Least sexy sex appeal ever. So people give 'em shit when filmed work is clumsy, too, even when it's successful.
Yes - but to be blunt, who's going to give a fuck if people "give 'em shit" as long as they're successful? In popular media, commercial success - today - trumps everything else. The question is, can they be successful at this?

I think comics get less of a pass too because at least when films objectify someone, there's still the fundamental advantage that it's a real person being filmed, a person with their own agency who contracted to be objectified; this knowledge, and the constraints of physicality, mitigate how bad a movie can be.

By contrast, comics present representations completely sprung out of a writer and artist's imagination...
Yeah, there's the rub - although I'd turn that around a bit. The problem for comics is that they have fewer tools with which to evoke - or exploit - sexuality...or, on a slightly less crass but similarly banal level, fewer tools with which to draw the audience into an ongoing love story. They don't have actors, they don't have editors or musicians or directors. They have still pictures, and words - and really, if movies and TV were dependent upon screenwriters and art directors/production designers to create romance and arousal they'd be screwed. There's nothing terribly sexy about Megan Fox's Transformers character on the page (whether script or storyboards), I can guarantee it - if you find her sexy in the movie it's because of the actor herself and all the folks on set who contribute to creating an illusion based on her performance.

Art/anatomical issues aside, I like the Catwoman sequence - and I like them making it narratively explicit that Lois Lane's got a sex life irrespective of Superman, that Clark is apparently capable of lust and jealousy where she's concerned, and frankly it wouldn't hurt the characters of Hal Jordan and Carol Ferris to see some real heat between them. But just how successfully this can be done, reliably, by creators who (however talented) have built their careers and honed their skills on what one of their own once described as "page after page of fight scenes and bad dialogue" remains to be seen.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2011, 05:01 AM   #877
Professor Zoom
Vice Admiral
 
Professor Zoom's Avatar
 
Location: Idealistic
Re: DC's New 52: Reviews and Discussion (Spoilers welcolme and likely)

Admiral_Young wrote: View Post
Yeah I agree...I think this was addressed during one of their many 52 panels and someone brought up what about marketing to kids, I can't remember what the answer was to this question. I'm guessing their attempt to bring in new readers means older readers or teenagers at the very least.
At three bucks a pop, or more, why would they market to kids? Kids either a. can't afford them or b. are saving to buy a video game that will give them HOURS and HOURS of entertainment, much more than a comic book.

Older readers are the only ones worth getting.
__________________
Batman does not eat nachos.
Professor Zoom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2011, 05:12 AM   #878
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: DC's New 52: Reviews and Discussion (Spoilers welcolme and likely)

Yes, what they seem to have decided to do here is to recognize and commit to a marketing strategy that the business has been evolving fitfully toward for a quarter of a century. When I was a kid, most comic book readers were grade school children and most of us abandoned comics as a major entertainment expenditure at a pretty young age. Stuff like Miller's Dark Knight or Moore's Watchmen, however, was not directed at such an audience. My sense is that Marvel's "X" titles are at the least aimed at a somewhat older adolescent audience with concerns somewhat more involved than obsessing over whether the Hulk can beat up the Thing. The most durably successful and lauded superhero movies in the current era are Nolan's and to a less reliable degree the aforementioned "angsty PG-13" X-Men series.

So, to some degree DC's just acknowledging that it's time to stop pretending that the success of these sorts of stories is or should be considered as outliers or exceptions. While there may be something unavoidably naive at the core of superhero narratives, the industry is not going to be made or broken by the devotion of nine year-old boys, but by intriguing - and yeah, sometimes titillating - a core audience that has grown older and can be appealed to by material that's more sophisticated in presentation and subject matter if not actually more mature in content.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2011, 09:21 PM   #879
Professor Zoom
Vice Admiral
 
Professor Zoom's Avatar
 
Location: Idealistic
Re: DC's New 52: Reviews and Discussion (Spoilers welcolme and likely)

Dennis wrote: View Post

So, to some degree DC's just acknowledging that it's time to stop pretending that the success of these sorts of stories is or should be considered as outliers or exceptions. While there may be something unavoidably naive at the core of superhero narratives, the industry is not going to be made or broken by the devotion of nine year-old boys, but by intriguing - and yeah, sometimes titillating - a core audience that has grown older and can be appealed to by material that's more sophisticated in presentation and subject matter if not actually more mature in content.
agreed. I wonder if they should make it even MORE adult--not in the sense of more boobs, butts and penis's, but just more adult stories. More complex characters. More "reality". More gritty thrillers. More... adult. I'm not sure how I want to describe it. Other than more for grown ups than for the man-child.
__________________
Batman does not eat nachos.
Professor Zoom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 26 2011, 12:57 AM   #880
Trekker4747
Trekker4747
 
Trekker4747's Avatar
 
Location: Kansas City
Re: DC's New 52: Reviews and Discussion (Spoilers welcolme and likely)

Well here's what I got going now:

Subscribed to Action Comics, Detective Comics, Superman and Batman, all of which I should get the #1's for (AC1 I have in-hand. The others I subscribed to during the time where DC "gaurnties" the #1 issues, if I end up not getting them I will just seek them out in other places.)

I'll probably get Supergirl, Catwoman and Wonder Woman #1s as those all look interesting, probably get them at a store or on Amazon.
Trekker4747 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 26 2011, 01:27 AM   #881
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: DC's New 52: Reviews and Discussion (Spoilers welcolme and likely)

I'm going to buy #2 of all the books I bought this month...though if I were new to Green Lantern I don't know that I would have based on this month. OTOH, maybe I'd have liked it better if I didn't already have expectations of the title. No way to know, I guess, and it doesn't matter.

If I had to pick a "second-iffiest" it would be Superboy - but I've enjoyed all of the books quite a bit, so that's only relative.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 26 2011, 01:30 AM   #882
the G-man
Commodore
 
the G-man's Avatar
 
Location: to your immediate right
Re: DC's New 52: Reviews and Discussion (Spoilers welcolme and likely)

Professor Zoom wrote: View Post
Dennis wrote: View Post

So, to some degree DC's just acknowledging that it's time to stop pretending that the success of these sorts of stories is or should be considered as outliers or exceptions. While there may be something unavoidably naive at the core of superhero narratives, the industry is not going to be made or broken by the devotion of nine year-old boys, but by intriguing - and yeah, sometimes titillating - a core audience that has grown older and can be appealed to by material that's more sophisticated in presentation and subject matter if not actually more mature in content.
agreed.
The problem with that theory is that it doesn't bring in new readers and hasn't brought in new readers. All it does is titillate a core audience that shrinks every year and, eventually, will be dead.
the G-man is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 26 2011, 01:30 AM   #883
Trekker4747
Trekker4747
 
Trekker4747's Avatar
 
Location: Kansas City
Re: DC's New 52: Reviews and Discussion (Spoilers welcolme and likely)

Yeah, Batman and Superman are the only two characters I'm interested in really following. I only want to get Supergirl because the opening page(s) previewed earlier looked interesting, as did the Wonder Woman pages I've seen. And then Catwoman for all of the fan-service that's apparently in it.
Trekker4747 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 26 2011, 03:34 AM   #884
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: DC's New 52: Reviews and Discussion (Spoilers welcolme and likely)

the G-man wrote: View Post
The problem with that theory is that it doesn't bring in new readers and hasn't brought in new readers.
Wrong. It's not a theory, and it's working right now.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 26 2011, 05:19 AM   #885
OdoWanKenobi
Ring Slinger
 
OdoWanKenobi's Avatar
 
Location: Ysmault
Re: DC's New 52: Reviews and Discussion (Spoilers welcolme and likely)

Today's Shortpacked! seems relevant to the thread:
http://www.shortpacked.com/2011/comi...dulthood/math/

That sums up my thoughts pretty well on how badly DC has handled this whole thing. The object should have been a focus on quality and accessibility. So far there has been little of either.
__________________
"In Brightest Day, in Blackest Night, no evil shall escape my sight. Let those who worship evil's might, beware my power: Green Lantern's light!"
OdoWanKenobi is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
batman, comic books, comics, dc comics, dc's new 52, justice league, superman, wonder woman

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:07 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.