Dora ([info]sigelphoenix) wrote,
@ 2007-08-23 15:57:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Current mood: nerdy
Entry tags:comic books

Geeking about Wonder Woman art
a.k.a. further development of my giant crush on Diana

Comics Dungeon had a big sale last weekend, so I picked up a bunch of trades, including some old X-Men books to round out my collection. [info]zinjadu also pointed me to the Greg Rucka run on Wonder Woman, so I grabbed those and so far I've read through Down to Earth and part of Bitter Rivals.

The trades are awesome, buuuuut the one thing impeding my enjoyment was the fact that every time I pulled out Down to Earth to read, I saw this. Why, why, why did DC decide to put Greg Land's fugly drawing on the cover of the trade? Why not keep the cover from the first printing? Why do we have to see Diana all pouty-lipped and vacant-eyed, with poorly drawn anatomy and ridiculously "windswept" hair? She has no ribcage. Her thighs are as wide as her head, with no visible muscle. The pose is static and boring; there's not even tension in her figure to make the picture interesting.

On the other hand, included in the trade is a pin-up by Stuart "Nextwave" Immonen that shows Diana standing still without looking boring at all. There's confidence in her pose, a sense of potential power and movement in both her and the jet. Unlike Land, Immonen knows what it means to be a storyteller with art (his pencils in Nextwave are really great, and worked even when Warren Ellis didn't include any dialogue).

Luckily, the rest of the covers in the trade are not by Land. Most of them are by J.G. Jones, who is a far better artist. I still have a nitpick with him, though, because in the covers for #200 (the image used for the first printing of the trade), #201, #202, #203, Diana's body is always twisted oddly, so her torso never faces the same direction as her legs. (In #202, it's not so bad, but her body is still tilted off balance, whereas behind her Veronica Cale's is not.) It doesn't make much sense, especially when I found this version of the cover of #200, which looks like the exact same image but with Diana turning to her left. This version is much improved, because at least her body doesn't switch directions twice. For the most part, Jones' paintings are good and he draws Diana with a reasonable (for a superheroine) body. It's just that one quirk.

Finally, I have to highlight this pin-up by Steve Rude, which was also included in the trade and is one of my favorite pictures of Diana ever. It's vibrant, detailed, and just happy. (Also, as [info]ratzeo points out, that black kitten on the right can only tell the truth now. XD)


(Post a new comment)


[info]maho_kiwi
2007-08-24 02:14 am UTC (link)
she has no ribcage! She has no hips! Her boobs are pastede on yay! she looks dead on the inside! Clearly she is a hero

>->


The twisting thing is a little weird, but I have to admit I like the first version of #200 you linked better -- Diana looks more like she's going somewhere. The cab driver is clealy going "omg a wonder woman!" while Diana is going "zoom must be somewhere v. important!" in the second version, for some reason she's really angry at something just to you the viewer's right -- if there's something big and scary over there, I don't know why the cab driver would be looking at wonder woman and not it. JUST MY OPINION THOUGH'

oh god, the kittens. And her expression. Cutest thing ever

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]sigelphoenix
2007-08-24 06:35 pm UTC (link)
she looks dead on the inside!

That's pretty much what Greg Land's women look like, yeah. :P The empty-eyed, pouty, 'I'm just here to be your sexy sexbot' look - it makes me think of Realdolls, actually. *shudder*

Yeah, good point about how the action should be happening in the #200 cover. The first version does make more sense in that context. It just looks like an awkward pose, where her head is facing right, her torso left, and her legs right again. o_o I would feel more confidence in the purposefulness of her flight if, y'know, her boobs weren't trying to go in the opposite direction. XD

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]lilisin
2007-08-24 02:21 am UTC (link)
Yeah that body twisting stuff is strange. Otherwise it's gorgeous art. I like how approachable and real she looks in 202. And in 203, holy shit! She looks like Lucy Lawless. That is totally a face Xena makes. And yes, the picture with the kittens is lovely.

Btw, speaking of Lucy Lawless, I LOVE this picture of her. Way for being a mom and still being uber sexy.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/39/97622295_1038cf5403.jpg

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]sigelphoenix
2007-08-24 06:25 pm UTC (link)
Yeah, the best renditions of Diana I've seen are the ones that make her approachable. It's one of the things I like about the penciller for those issues (example). He does a good job of making her look beautiful and powerful, but also friendly and welcoming.

That *is* a nice picture of Lucy Lawless. I like how motherhood and sexiness coexist so well in that shot.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]tea_at_tiffs
2007-08-24 04:46 pm UTC (link)
Yeah, Diana's poses look really weird. If I were a flying superheroine, I would find flying in that twisty pose hard for straight on vision, plus I would need a chiropractor really quick. :p

Otherwise, I think they're obviously going for the full-on boob shot. I mean, Merlin knows what would happen to sales if male readers only saw one boob, or even three-quarters! :O

Hmm, WW looks kind of like Angelina Jolie in #202. What really bothers me is her vacant & blank eyes. >:/

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]sigelphoenix
2007-08-24 06:27 pm UTC (link)
I think they're obviously going for the full-on boob shot.

Yeah, that's what seems to be going on there. That, and the habit of making women stand off-balance, always tilting or swaying their bodies. I don't know if the artist really knows that he's doing this - he might just be that deep in the habit.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]miss_arel
2007-08-24 07:34 pm UTC (link)
Uuggghh, Greg Land... *shudders* That lovely inking and coloring is so wasted on him. >_< I really like the Immonen pinup, though, I've wanted to read more of his stuff ever since I got introduce to 'Nextwave'.

I'm kind of torn as far as the 200 cover goes: The angle of her torso makes so much more sense in the second version, but in the first version, the expression on her face and the way her head is angled up makes her look much more goddess-y and heroic, which is what I kinda feel the whole composition is meant to indicate.

*sigh* If they're not going to let women be comic artists, then they should at least give the male ones breast implants until they finally figure out that no, that's not how they work.

Eee! Kittens!

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]sigelphoenix
2007-08-24 11:08 pm UTC (link)
Yeah, it's bad enough to see Land art, but it's even worse if you see good artists like Immonen around the same time. Then you can see how art really can be used to tell a story - like, with movement and continuity and everything! :P

You and [info]maho_kiwi are right, the first version does work better overall, if not for that weird torso angle.

That would be nice - then they could realize that no, breasts aren't filled with helium and don't float in midair, creating perfect cleavage no matter what the clothing or position. And also, breasts larger than head = PAIN for active, athletic women.

I love the kittens. ♥

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]pinstripesuit
2007-08-27 02:47 am UTC (link)
Hello! [info]miss_arel pointed me here because she thought I might find your journal interesting. I'm a graphic design student in Boston, and for my degree project this fall I will be explaining/exploring the concept of the male gaze using comic books. She said I might find some very useful information here.

Is it okay if I friend you?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]sigelphoenix
2007-08-27 03:41 am UTC (link)
By all means! I'm quite flattered you want to.

I'm afraid I haven't really written about that specific topic, but some of the people I link to have. Here are some that should be useful (if you haven't seen them yet): a general discussion, Wizard's tutorial on drawing women, a parody in response, further parodying, and tekanji's category of comic book posts.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]pinstripesuit
2007-08-27 05:50 am UTC (link)
I've seen a lot of those before, but thanks for the links! I've been trying to get a lot of research done before school starts and things get crazy.

*adds*

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]sigelphoenix
2007-08-27 04:43 pm UTC (link)
Good luck! Let me know if there's anything else I can do to help.

(Reply to this) (Parent)
Day at the fair?
(Anonymous)
2007-08-28 07:07 pm UTC (link)
The only problem I have with the Day at The Fair print is that with the red leaves, it appears that the fair is in the fall (The corn is also available) but those are maple tree seeds fluttering to the ground. Maples shed their seeds in the spring.

For me it ruins an otherwise great picture
Dwayne "The canoe guy"

(Reply to this) (Thread)
Re: Day at the fair?
[info]sigelphoenix
2007-08-28 08:18 pm UTC (link)
Whoops, didn't notice that! Thanks for pointing it out.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Create an Account
Forgot your login?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…