She-Hulk’s recent Starfox-centered storyline is a topic that’s come up again on the blogosphere recently and people are weighing in their thoughts:

Point:

Blog@ contributor Ragnell starts things off by explaining how she began to lose interest in the She-Hulk comic:

Which means we have another fake rape accusation in the pop culture consciousness. In a culture where it already so damned hard to bring a rape to trial because so many people that women are just waiting to make an accusation at the slightest offense. Where I can get into a 45 minute argument at work with men who think that there is actually some sort of gain in going to the police to report a rape, which goes the exact opposite of every statistic and anecdote I’ve ever heard about it.

Counterpoint:

On her livejournal, mildredmilton explains why she disagrees with Ragnell’s interpretation:

Honestly, it never read like that to me. To me, it was very clear that the victim was raped. She wasn’t ‘making something up.’ Starfox did use his powers on her. That did remove her ability to reason, and thus did not allow her to consent. She was raped.

The argument isn’t that Starfox is innocent. If anything the only defense is diminished capacity to reason. He didn’t know that he was using his powers, just thought that the woman was willing to have sex with him. In fact, at the end of the story, Starfox willingly gives up his powers, horrified by his own brush with mind control. He’s then told that before his sin is fully expiated he has to seek forgiveness from all his ‘victims.’ The word they use is ‘victims.’ It’s clear that what he did was rape, even if he didn’t know it.

So what do you think?

So Civil War has come to an end this week and naturally almost everyone’s talking about it. Some are happy with the ending, some aren’t, but the question at the core of the series is still getting some pretty interesting answer: which side are you on?

Point

While he has problems with the execution, 4th Letter guest blogger Mark Poa is actually pro-registration:

Excerpt:

Why is Superhero registration necessary?
1. People with superpowers are similar to special skills. CPAs, lawyers, doctors, and other professionals are registered so that their skills can be monitored and standards could be set for their use. I see superheroes as going through this route… registering as professional superheroes.
2. Registering would mean having standards. Training, education, special tests… all to ensure that activities would be regulated and that special provisions can be made for the use of special skills.
3. It’s a failsafe in case a superhuman goes rogue. Real names are registered.

Counterpoint

Amy Reads, on the other hand, is very adamantly anti-registration:

Excerpt:

Why, you ask, Gentle Reader? Or perhaps, you don’t ask, but merely nod your head and agree that indeed, Registration is many things: anti-hero, anti-American, anti-freedom. Yes, all of those things are true, but even more so, I read the Registration Initiative as the early stages of Forced Removal, or Ghettoization, or other such government initiatives to forcibly remove–or mark –certain racial, religious, etc. groups from the general public. First, they mark them, those superheroes. Then, when they refuse to be marked, they are imprisoned. When they do register, they are forced to work for the government, regardless if they want to or not, or are even relocated away from their homes and families. All in secret, mind you. But even when Prison Number 42 is revealed to the public, as it is in #7, Reed Richards remarks that the public met the Negative Zone Prison with resounding applause and support.

What do you think?

One of the biggest topics circling around the blogosphere this week has been the news that Joss Whedon will no longer be working on the Wonder Woman movie. The reactions have been naturally mixed

Point:

Melody_Kitty is puzzled by this turn of events:

So Joss had an idea about a movie that the studios didn’t agree with… are these people aware that this man has one of the largest (if not the largest) following in fandom, he’s created most popular show of the last decade and a successful spin off, he’s writing and wrote for major comic book titles… did I mention he has a huge following?!I’d think that be keeping a man of that fannish stature would serve in the interests of these huge studios, specifically when said man is known for writing female heroines.

Counterpoint

Scipio of the Absorbascon, on the other hand, thinks the split is a good thing:

Let me set aside for a moment that I can’t stand Whedon’s work or understand its appeal. Whedon’s been unable to figure out what he wants the script to do and who he wants to play Wonder Woman. He didn’t want her in her traditional costume or fighting any of her traditional villains. Basically, Whedon wanted a big movie, but didn’t really want to make one about Wonder Woman. And apparently this isn’t merely my assessment, but Whedon’s as well, since he admitted in exit interviews that after a while, the whole pairing of him with the project just didn’t seem to be working on either end.

So what do you think?

The most recent issue of Teen Titans has made waves in a number of ways. Particularly notable, for members of Girl-Wonder.org, is that Tim Drake has given Stephanie Brown her own memorial case. (Caution, there are plot spoilers in that link)

Point:

Girl-Wonder’s Mary is pleased by this development.

I am well chuffed by this particular development. If I wasn’t mourning the loss of this creative team just this morning, I’d have double reason to do so now.

Oh, if only the comics here hadn’t been delayed this week. I wish to squee with paper in my hands.

Counterpoint:

Karen Healey is also happy but reminds us that she wants more:

Dear DC,Excellent start! I am honestly impressed. But you’re not quite there yet - a Spoiler case in the Robin!cave is fantastic, but a Robin case for Steph in the Batcave is what’ll get you the glory.

Love,
Karen.

So what are your thoughts?

Cassandra Cain, DC’s Batgirl, has been a topic of discussion among many in the blogosphere this week. Her personality, costume, and storylines have all come under scrutiny. Especially her costume.

Point:

Johanna of Comics Worth Reading thinks that Batgirl is creepy.

Excerpt:

And she doesn’t even get into what I find most annoying about the character, the disturbingly sexist symbolism of the stitched-shut mouth. Gotta keep the girls silent! And implied violence to a sex-related body part is only a bonus.

Counterpoint:

Cassandra Cain fan JLG provides his own impressions.

Excerpt:

I never, ever got the impression that her uniform was fetish gear. And I really don’t care to look that stuff up. To be honest, it didn’t really stick out any different that most other superhero uniforms - off the top of my head, Supernova, the Spider-People don’t have those lower-face openings. True, her bat uniform is stitched up where that opening traditionally is. However, I don’t think this can necessarily be interpreted as her being “silenced” as Johanna argued it was. It’s not totally out of bounds, since it’s stithes on something that masks and obscures the usual opening in the Bat uniform.

It’s worth a read! Check it out!

The April solicitations for DC Comics have announced the cancellation of Manhunter and Firestorm at issues #30 and #35 respectively. This, naturally, has gotten people talking.

Point:

Iain Jackson is unsurprised by the cancellation of Manhunter.

And, to nobody’s surprise, Manhunter bows out in April, this time likely for good. Seriously, the chances that another four-five issues, all tied into Crisis Crisis Redux, would pull in new readers under these conditions was just about nil. If they’d really wanted new readers, DC would have rushed trades into print; instead, they forced people to try to find older issues to see what all the fuss was about. If most retailers were like Chicago Comics, they just plain didn’t have a lot of back issues, never mind continuous runs. I mostly liked what I’ve seen in the two trades (although volume 2’s link to the OMAC Project was seriously annoying), but there was just no way to keep up easily.

Counterpoint:

Loren Javier, on the other hand, refuses to accept the end of Manhunter.

Excerpt:

I can’t believe that DC would give Manhunter a chance to survive cancellation and find an audience, only to cancel it again with only one issue for which we know the sales for. According to ICv2, sales for Manhunter #26 is an estimated 23,767 and ranks #96. Is that Batman, Justice League of America or X-Men numbers? No. BUT, it’s very close to sales of She-Hulk at Marvel which, I understand, is respectable. It’s about 4,000 units away from Birds of Prey. And, it ranked higher than Catwoman.

What do you think?

This interview with Chuck Dixon has been inspiring a lot of reaction across the comic blogosphere.

Point:

Steven of the Roar of Comics is impressed by the interview and Mr. Dixon’s capacity for writing stories belying his own personal politics:

Excerpt:

Specifically, he states that he’s pro-death penalty, which surprised me, because Joker: The Devil’s Advocate is one of the best arguments against the death penalty I have ever read.Now, I’ve made no secret of the fact that I’m a Dixon fan but Devil’s Advocate is a cut above. Not only does it feature some of Graham Nolan’s best art ever, as well as a Joker that is intelligent, vicious, crazy, and actually funny, it presents the ultimate test case for the death penalty: The Joker.

Counterpoint:

Girl-Wonder.org’s own Mary finds certain of Mr. Dixon’s remarks inconsistent:

Excerpt:

Uh, Chuck, dude, remember that time you had a pregnant Spoiler preached to by Robin about how she shouldn’t keep her child, even though she wanted to, because it deserved to grow up with a mother and a father, not be raised by a young single mom? Despite the fact that having both parents in the family unit hadn’t exactly helped either Stephanie or Tim grow up fitter, happier, more productive?

I decided to try something a little different for this Point/Counterpoint rather than spotlighting a direct argument.  

Point:

Way back in 2003, the Metrokitty had a post about a narrative formula she calls “You Touched My Stuff!

Counterpoint:

In 2007, livejournalist Kadymae has used Kitty’s concept to examine the first storyarc of American Virgin.

Excerpt:

So, I’ve been reading (and enjoying) American Virgin, and while I was making a post to one of STs lists, it dawned on me that the first story arc of the book is “you touched my stuff” if you put “the whole kettle of fish in a nutshell”.But it doesn’t feel like a typical “you touched my stuff” story to me. It’s not making me all eye-rolly and annoyed.

It’s an interesting read.

I hope the holidays have treated everyone well!

Point

At Post-Modern Barney, Dorian gives his personal take on issues of sexism and misogyny in the industry in his post: 2006 Wrap-Up Awards.

Excerpt:

Because while there is ample evidence of institutional sexism in the comics industry, and more than our fair share of out and out misogynists working in the industry and in fandom, whether or not Stephanie Brown has a display case in the Batcave is a real hard-sell for me as a legitimate grounds for calling out DC for sexism. Batgirl becoming evil is not evidence of misogyny, it’s evidence of sloppy writing. Every time I see a fanboy or fangirl entitlement rant disguised as a serious discussion of gender issues, I cringe, because all those false accusations of sexism confuse the signal to noise ratio to the point where genuine issues of sexism and misogyny get lost, or dismissed out of hand.

Counterpoint

Loren at One Diverse Comic Book Nation responds with his own thoughts.

Excerpt:

However, I do think that when discourse becomes counter productive is when any room for discussion becomes impossible and when all intent is labeled as evil. I do believe that what happened to Steph Brown and how she was honored (or not honored) after she died is misogynist. And, I think that trying to get DC to give her a display case is a noble cause. But, I agree that it should not be argued in terms of DC now being the evil empire of sexism and misogyny. Unfortunately, that’s not going to motivate any change whatsoever. Am I saying sexism and misogyny doesn’t exist there? No. But, I don’t think that’s what drives the company. I don’t think Dan DiDio sits in his office and asks, “How can I screw over women?”

It’s an interesting discussion, I recommend taking a look!

This is “Point/Counterpoint in the Blogosphere…” where we take a look at what has YOU talking. Today, I’ll be showcasing two related discussion points about a particular topic, to help you keep up with some of the hot topics in comic fandom.

The television show Heroes has become quite popular among many comic book fans and has naturally generated quite a lot of discussion. The most recent topic of interest has to do with the sexuality of one of the characters on the show.

For those not following the issue, the character Zach on Heroes was originally hinted to be gay, with behind the scenes comments confirming this. However, more recently, the word has shifted, with official behind the scenes commentary re-affirming his heterosexuality. Naturally, this has caused a lot of interesting discussion.

Point:

Dorian at Post Modern Barney reacts to this news:

Excerpt:

Should that decision stand, and not be reversed by negative publicity pointing out the blatant homophobia of this change, it would be disappointing, but not surprising. Gay characters tend to be invisible to non-existent in science fiction, despite producers and writers talking a good game about “gender blind” universes, and the popularity of science fiction in the gay community. (Seriously, we all seem to be big geeks for it.) But, at the end of the day, there are no gay characters on Battlestar Galactica, no gay characters on Star Trek (apart from the occasional pandering lesbian tease), no gay characters in Star Wars. Even Captain Jack, on Doctor Who and Torchwood, would be better described as omni-sexual than gay.

Counterpoint:

Lyle at Crocodile Caucus has a more optimistic take on the news:

Excerpt:

In short, there’s now pressure to set things right with those angered by the change and (again, if the rumor is true) the person who instigated it won’t be able to make a similar incident happen again. Hopefully, that’ll lead to a gay character on Heroes who’ll have a bigger part in the series’ story than Zach did.

What are your thoughts?

This is “Point/Counterpoint in the Blogosphere…” where we take a look at what has YOU talking. Today, I’ll be showcasing two related discussion points about a particular topic, to help you keep up with some of the hot topics in comic fandom.

Teen Titans has introduced quite a few new members during the One Year Later story-arc. One of the more buzz-worthy of these newcomers is the very cute Miss Martian.

(Warning: Linked entries contain spoilers for Teen Titans #41)

Point:

In his review of Teen Titans #41, Rokk Krinn explains his feelings about the new character:

Excerpt:

I like that Miss Martian and Raven have re-joined the team. Raven should always be a Titan, so I’m glad she is back. Miss Martian is a new addition that has plenty of potential. Even though I don’t enjoy derivative heroes, I have to admit that Miss Martian is pretty interesting. She isn’t a true derivative hero and has a personality and image very distinct from Martian Manhunter. I’m curious to see what Johns has in store for her character. Plus, you know that little Miss Martian is hiding a pretty big secret.

Counterpoint:

Spandex Justice’s Vincent J. Murphy likes the idea of Miss Martian but has problems with the way she’s portrayed in the issue:

Excerpt:

But in Teen Titans #41, something is really really off. The cute Miss Martian isn’t that cute when drawn by Paco Diaz and Ryan Benjamin. Early in the issue, she’s drawn correctly: younger, girlish. But that doesn’t last long. By mid-book, she’s suddenly become a double-D, hanging out of her red X, sultry smirking vixen. And that’s just not right. It’s a jarring change, unattractive, and seems to go against the concept of the character (well, to me, at least).

What’s your take?

This is “Point/Counterpoint in the Blogosphere…” where we take a look at what has YOU talking. Today, I’ll be showcasing two related discussion points about a particular topic, to help you keep up with some of the hot topics in comic fandom.

The first issue of Howard Chaykin’s prestige mini-series Guy Gardner: Collateral Damage came out this week. As with most #1 issues, the reviews are mixed. (Do be warned, the linked entries will likely have spoilers)

Point:

Jog of Jog - The Blog gives the issue a positive review recommending it as a good fit for Howard Chaykin:

Excerpt:

The plot darts around from location to location at almost the furious clip of Time2, characters crack odd jokes and strut through heavily decorated rooms. Images, images, textures, textures. Chaykin’s still an odd duck among superhero artists, but this is pretty easily the most satisfying of his genre works of recent vintage. Suggesting, therefore, that the trick is not for he to come to the genre, but to force the genre to come to him.

Counterpoint:

Long time Green Lantern fan SallyP is less satisfied about the results.

Excerpt:

It is as though he read through Beau Smith’s “Warrior”, and cherry-picked out the parts that he liked, while ignoring completely the character developments that Mr. Smith gave to Guy. He has Guy acting like a complete jerk of course, as bad as he ever was in the old Justice League, when he was a brain-dead 10-year old, but he hasn’t been that way in quite some time, due to the aforesaid developments of Beau Smith and Geoff Johns.

Both reviews seem to indicate that big fans of Howard Chaykin will enjoy the series, while Green Lantern fans very likely will not. What’s your take?

This is “Point/Counterpoint in the Blogosphere…” where we take a look at what has YOU talking. Today, I’ll be showcasing two related discussion points about a particular topic, to help you keep up with some of the hot topics in comic fandom.

Today’s topic is the long-awaited third issue of the new Wonder Woman series. The question now is, after months and months of waiting, is it good?

(Warning, the excerpts and linked blogs contain spoilers for Wonder Woman #3)

(more…)

This is “Point/Counterpoint in the Blogosphere…” where we take a look at what has YOU talking. Twice a week, I’ll be showcasing two related discussion points about a particular topic, to help you keep up with some of the hot topics in comic fandom.

Last week, blogger and new comic writer Kevin Church wrote something called A Handy Primer For My Fellow Neophyte Comics Creators, a piece devoted to proper etiquette and common sense when dealing with negative reviews.

Point:

Via livejournal, creator Rikki Simons posts a rebuttal to Kevin’s primer.

Excerpt:

In fact all of these points expect point two — do not immediately assume they are a moron — I mostly disagree with. I don’t think they’re morons. I think they’re often just full of themselves. Critics, take your lumps, just like we do. You cannot post a review to a blog with a comments section turned on or your e-mail made public without expecting to hear from the author if they disagree with you. Your review is not any more immune from recrimination than an author’s books are.

Counterpoint:

Lyle at Crocodile Caucus responds to Simons’s rebuttal with his post Reviewing the Reviewer.

Excerpt:

I find it interesting that Simons seems to think that the only motivation anyone ever has to write a negative review is to allow the reviewer to demonstrate their superiority to the artist with their cutting put downs, as if the working principle is “Those who can’t belittle those who do.” instead of a desire to discuss their enjoyment of pop culture in more detail than “That series is the greatest!”

It’s an interesting discussion, go check it out!

This is “Point/Counterpoint in the Blogosphere…” where we take a look at what has YOU talking. Twice a week, I’ll be showcasing two related discussion points about a particular topic, to help you keep up with some of the hot topics in comic fandom.

Recently, an essay regarding the Body Mass Index with regards to Marvel characters was linked here on Newsarama. Though it’s unconventional to use something already linked at Newsarama as a Point, I think it’s worth reading again especially in tandem with the Counterpoint.

Point

Karen Healey’s BMI Conclusions

Counterpoint

Katherine of Whereof One Can Speak points out the problems inherent in analyzing off of Handbook stats especially with regards to artists’ portrayals:

Excerpt:

All of these female characters’ BMIs could be increased by 3 according to the Handbook stats, and nothing in the actual comics would change: they’d still be drawn to look like anorexic teenagers or blow-up dolls if the wrong artist got hold of them, and their storylines would still be just as bad as they were before.

Katherine continues with an example of an unusual reverse sort of situation wherein a character that should be dangerously skinny is actually drawn as too plump.

Karen and Katherine’s entries are both incredibly interesting and definitely worth reading when considering body image as portrayed in comics.

This is “Point/Counterpoint in the Blogosphere…” where we take a look at what has YOU talking. Twice a week, I’ll be showcasing two related discussion points about a particular topic, to help you keep up with some of the hot topics in comic fandom.

It’s always interesting when the tv show Smallville starts incorporating more elements from the comic books. The most notable recently being the introduction of Oliver Queen, or Green Arrow, to the cast. Now that he’s been around for a while, people are posting their reactions. 

Point

On MySpace, a blogger named Felix/Ramon posts optimistically about the introduction of Green Arrow to the Smallville television show:

Excerpt:

Now, usually when big characters from the DC Comics universe appear on Smallville, they’re not in a costume, but then again, when most have appeared they haven’t been in “crimefighting” mode, and that appears to be how they’re setting up Ollie. Crimefighter with a secret identity and a slight smirk on his face when he has to downplay his abilities in order not to give himself away. Sound like anybody we know? With Clark isolated, with only Chloe to talk to as far as his life and abilities (and Chloe now preoccupied with her own blossoming romance), it seems the writers on Smallville are setting up Ollie to be a mentor figure to Clark, someone who will perhaps impart on the future-Superman how to better live with having a double life, and maybe how to enjoy it a little.

Counterpoint

Meanwhile, One Diverse Comic Nation’s Loren is less enthused about Green Arrow’s presence, even though he likes the portrayal itself:

Excerpt:

Now, I know that Smallville is not really cannon to the comic books and has its own history, but there’s something about making Green Arrow being the first costumed hero of Superman’s generation to don a costume in Metropolis. In my mind’s eye, Superman is the first hero of Metropolis. He’s the hero who’s inspired heroes to come, not Green Arrow. For me, it smashes the mythos of DC superheroes altogether.

So, is the introduction of Green Arrow a positive sign or a negative one? What do you think?

This is “Point/Counterpoint in the Blogosphere…” where we take a look at what has YOU talking. Twice a week, I’ll be showcasing two related discussion points about a particular topic, to help you keep up with some of the hot topics in comic fandom.

When a popular character undergoes a drastic change of character, the results can be very complicated and messy. In the case of Cassandra Cain, since her reappearance in Robin, One Year Later, her change has gotten a largely negative reception.

The interesting thing though, comes of what happens after. When the writer of the issues in question comes forward to explain the motivations and thoughts behind the character change. Recently, Adam Beechen, the writer of Robin, gave a couple of interviews to CBR, addressing this change.

Point:

David Brothers at 4th Letter points out a particular part that he liked from one of the interviews.

Counterpoint:

Diamondrock from Title Undetermined is less happy about a quote from the other interview and explains why.

Today’s P/CP is less about a direct contradiction/opposition as it is an attempt to relate a couple of different responses to related issues. They’re very interesting to read, take a look!

This is “Point/Counterpoint in the Blogosphere…” where we take a look at what has YOU talking. Twice a week, I’ll be showcasing two related discussion points about a particular topic, to help you keep up with some of the hot topics in comic fandom.

Point:

H at the Comic Treadmill is unhappy with the current direction taken by Marvel Comics, but attempts to examine some of the reasoning behind the changes in a generally optimistic manner:

Excerpt:

More questions I can’t begin to answer, but I don’t think it likely at all that if Quesada fails that the Marvel Comics line fails. Nor do I think Quesada’s strategy will fail to the point of the line of comics collapsing. More likely, the Quesada era will march along a bit longer and then the tone of the stories will shift to meet perceived consumer demand and/or the wishes of the next top dog. But for the next few years, I don’t foresee much change.

(Original Article)

Counterpoint:

Charles at Ink Destroyed My Brush is a bit more pessimistic about the outcome:

Excerpt:

Where does Quesada think that this is going to leave the properties? Somewhere that they can make more million dollar pictures off of? Spider Man is just about done. I’m willing to be that the 2008 Iron Man movie is going to be a lot closer to the Iron Man that I remember, than the one that we’ll end up with in Civil War. If they had just made the FF as the Incredibles we’d have another billion dollar franchise to watch. No one is going to make this FF into even a fan film.

How can this be a good idea?

(Original Article)

So what do you think about the current changes and their ultimate effects on the Marvel franchise?