Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The new politically correct Vamprilla and Dejah Thoris

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Well, if you like men sexualised in other ways that fine with me. But I was thinkng of how women generally like them. Specifically woman romance readers. Those novel covers are full of bare chested muscle men.


    Originally posted by ChastMastr View Post
    *headdesk*

    I think those are both valid ways to sexualize both men and women--but so are the reverse, and even others not listed. Not all people (of whatever gender or sexuality) want the same things from those they consider sexy. The assumption here that the only way to sexualize both men and women are "power and strength" for one and "feminine form" (which, by definition, women already have) "and beauty" is precisely the issue.

    Comment


    • #32
      Perception is what you decide to give it.

      The art in the comic book should express the character. With Vampirella it should express sex and death. Below is Trina Robbin's ( the feminist who did the original design) version. Salacious? not really, Sexist? not unless you think a one piece swimsuit is. Sex and death? Yep! And she not flaming Lara Croft either. Works for me.

      Click image for larger version

Name:	20TrinaRobbinsInterviewPtI07.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	35.3 KB
ID:	49060



      Originally posted by ChastMastr View Post
      I agree with most of bobrobertson's post--I do think that bikinis (and speedos) and thongs (and, well, thongs) for female (and male) characters can work, but the different perception that female characters get is definitely a real problem.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by ralphuniverse View Post
        Well, if you like men sexualised in other ways that fine with me.
        I didn't say I did; it's not about me.

        Comment


        • #34
          And what's wrong with Lara Croft? She seems to have been popular for quite some time now, including as a sex symbol. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lara_Croft#Sex_symbol

          Comment


          • #35
            Nothing but she's not Vampi. If DE want to do Lara Croft let them get the rights to the character.

            Originally posted by ChastMastr View Post
            And what's wrong with Lara Croft? She seems to have been popular for quite some time now, including as a sex symbol. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lara_Croft#Sex_symbol

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by ddamaged View Post
              It seems as though some readers have difficulty distinguishing between sexY and sexIST, between images that celebrate the female form and those that exploit it for the Male Gaze. And sadly most of these readers are males. The male readers claim it's about preserving comic history, but their objections really are about titillation and objectifying women. Because on an unconscious level they believe women's purpose is to please and satisfy men.
              Nice dogmatic viewpoint. Hey, if we start spouting that rhetoric too, are we allowed to cut our own balls off or does someone come along and do that for us?

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by ralphuniverse View Post
                And she not flaming Lara Croft either. Works for me.
                Claire Redfield, not Lara Croft

                http://static.giantbomb.com/uploads/...e_redfield.jpg

                Comment


                • #38
                  Oh sure, let's put Sue Storm in a bikini. That's absolutely the right thing to do, since the women in comics are just there to be objects. Or maybe not all characters need to be portrayed the same way, because they're all different characters, and maybe something about the way a character dresses says something about that character. Maybe a character that wears a 3-piece suit is a different kind of character than one who wears a t-shirt and jeans, an old leather jacket and a baseball cap. But maybe Bruce Wayne or Tony Stark should try the latter look, just for the sake of change. But sure, if we can change Vampirella's costume, then it's fair to put Sue Storm in a thong, right? How's that any different?

                  Maybe if this were the real world, characters wouldn't ever dress the same way every day, and have a whole closet full of different outfits to wear whenever the mood struck or the situation was different. If they're just going to wear one outfit most of the time, then maybe that outfit is some kind of statement about who they are. Therefore, when you radically change their style of dress, you're actually changing who they are, or who they're saying they are to the world.
                  Last edited by pulphero; 10-24-2015, 05:45 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Actually...

                    First appearance:

                    http://oyster.ignimgs.com/wordpress/...ble-woman1.png

                    Click image for larger version

Name:	sue2.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	32.9 KB
ID:	49065

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by pulphero View Post
                      But sure, if we can change Vampirella's costume, then it's fair to put Sue Storm in a thong, right? How's that any different?
                      Jokes about Sue's 90s costume aside, do you really not see a difference?

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Not to mention that most comics characters have had various costumes off and on for decades and decades now--sometimes even new identities as part of one storyline or another. Why can't these characters have new costumes, at least for a while? We've already been told that in the case of Vampi, her classic outfit will be seen again.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by ChastMastr View Post
                          Jokes about Sue's 90s costume aside, do you really not see a difference?
                          What, you mean one's politically correct, and the other's politically incorrect? All I care about is whether it's true to the character or not. They had to explain Sue Storm's irrational fashion decisions on manipulation by the Psycho-Man (I think that's who it was, IIRC). DE's got no such excuse, because they don't have a character who's literally called psycho, man - but that's what it amounts to IMO.
                          Last edited by pulphero; 10-25-2015, 04:37 AM.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by ChastMastr View Post
                            Not to mention that most comics characters have had various costumes off and on for decades and decades now--sometimes even new identities as part of one storyline or another. Why can't these characters have new costumes, at least for a while? We've already been told that in the case of Vampi, her classic outfit will be seen again.
                            They not only CAN, they do. You just can't please all of the people all of the time, so we all get to cast our votes with our consumer dollars, don't we? It's not as if we have no other options to spend our money on, right? I guess I can sort of promise to take another look at the comic again, when that happens, then. Until then, I'll just bet there's a more interesting comic to spend my money on being published by someone else. That's what it comes to - are you voting FOR or AGAINST the new costume. Cast your dollars or keep them in your wallet.

                            In the end it boils down to this -- I was overjoyed by the most recent series of Vampirella by Nancy Collins and Patrick Berkenkotter. I loved the miniseries Vampirella's Feary Tales, and Dawn/Vampirella, and even the one-shot specials Vampirella: Prelude to Shadows, #100, and the 2015 Annual. This was some of the best stuff Dynamite has ever published, light-years ahead of what they were doing with Vampi when they first acquired the character, and some of the best Vampirella stories ever. Now they've decided all that is over and done with, and it doesn't appear that any of those creators will be involved or anything they've established will be further expanded upon, and they're just going to "reimagine" a "new direction" and a new costume, in hopes of pulling in new readers. So I'm re-imagining a new direction in which to direct my comic-spending budget. They're using the all-new, all-different costume to advertise the new Vampirella as having nothing to do with the most recent stuff, a great "jump-on" point for all those newbies who just walked out of the movie theater into their first comic con and are looking for a comic book to read (and not coincidentally, care nothing about the history of the character). Well, good luck with that, DE. Call me when you're over this phase.

                            You know, one of the pitfalls of having a character that's been published by several different publishers and rebooted a couple of times in the process, as well as having the normal ever-changing creative teams is that you don't have a real solid continuity there to inspire reader loyalty. You need something more than just a name that's trademark-able, and the kind of common-sense "well, she's a female vampire" to go on. So to that extent, the visual continuity of the iconic Vampirella costume was the biggest continuity point Vampirella had going for her. (Taking her out of that is like giving Superman a new costume without a Big Red S on the shirt.) Is she an alien? The daughter of a mythical/Biblical witch? Does she have wings? Does she drink human blood, or subsist on a chemical substitute serum, etc. Take away the costume, there's not much left that you can claim with 100% certainty, including her ever-changing supporting cast. Well, she has black hair. More than perhaps any other character that comes immediately to mind, Vampirella is defined by what she looks like - a sexy monstress who's the heroine of the story, who looks like that, and doesn't care what people think about it - and that's about as much as she's got going on that's more core than anything else.

                            And you know what? I didn't buy Harris' manga VAMPI, and I'm not buying this new version either. At least when DE first acquired Vampi and they decided to mess with her costume in the interior art of the stories, they were still sane enough to keep her in her classic costume on the covers. What the hell were they thinking, your guess is as good as mine -- but you'd think they'd have learned something from that mess, other than that they need to hire better writers and artists.
                            Last edited by pulphero; 10-25-2015, 06:58 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by pulphero View Post
                              What the hell were they thinking, your guess is as good as mine -- but you'd think they'd have learned something from that mess, other than that they need to hire better writers and artists.
                              Sorry to bring you the bad news, but hiring better writers (c'mon, the Dynamite run didn't have exactly bad artists!) would be very very expensive. In contrast, changing the costume is a free lunch. That is, until the rest of the readers run away.

                              In the end, it boils down to the question whether there are more SJWs (folks, I'm a German, I had to google that first) or more ecchis. :P Some statistics might be helpful. As worlds biggest Vampirella fan (don't talk back) I DLed each and every Vampirella pic available on the Net, of course far more fanart than "official" stuff. From ~50000 pics, ~5000 show nudity, ~500 might be outright porn*. The Anime Vampi is practically nonexistent, and offhand I know exactly 1 pic with her "Dinsdale!" warrior nun armor. (Project Rooftop's "Revamp" contest gave ~100 entries, BTW - mostly as revealing as the original.) I don't expect that the new costume will appear on more than a few initial pics.

                              * P.S. I own the (sucking) 1st run German translation. Some Beavis jerk drew warts on her sideboobs with copic, no wonder I got the issues so cheap. So there might be someone actually fapping to Vampirella, but he must be around 80 and a total wreck now.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by shokoshu View Post


                                Sorry to bring you the bad news, but hiring better writers (c'mon, the Dynamite run didn't have exactly bad artists!) would be very very expensive.
                                Well, they managed it for a little bit longer than a year, with Nancy Collins and J. Michael Linsner, which amounted to some of the best stories the character has seen since the days of Warren, with Archie Goodwin and couple of other writers, outside of some individual story arcs at the end of the Harris run. Guess the sales didn't pan out, so now they have to tighten their belts again. I don't mean to sound ungrateful for what I got, but you know, you always hope for... 'Onward and upward'. Again with the artists, the first DE run was a little better than most of Harris' output (apart from Mike Mayhew and a couple of other short-lived drafts), but Patrick Berkenkotter and Linsner represented an apex from which it seems we can only go down again.

                                Where Vampi has benefitted most greatly under the auspices of DE is in their reprint program. Virtually everything worth having Vampirella-related is now in print. The (soon-to-be) complete Warren run (VAMPIRELLA ARCHIVES), the worthwhile bits of the Harris era (VAMPIRELLA MASTERS) and all of DE's stuff in TPBs... including those 4 beautiful HC art books collecting the best single images of Vampi.
                                Last edited by pulphero; 10-25-2015, 07:29 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X