[QUOTE=numberthirty;2535198]And, he made sense when?[/QUOTE]
I'll agree with you there. The concept of the First Born was flawed in many ways.
Printable View
[QUOTE=numberthirty;2535198]And, he made sense when?[/QUOTE]
I'll agree with you there. The concept of the First Born was flawed in many ways.
[QUOTE=LoveStar;2535294]Why are you stuck on comparing a grown woman to a child? It's a short dress with tearings. It's not UBER-revealing but not something a kid would wear either period. Still no point with this comparison.
Um...no its not necessary for Steve to be shirtless. Everyone got hit with Ares blasting in and nobody else lost their shirt but the writer chose to force it in for Steve even when it's not necessary. That's exactly what the team wants for that reaction every time and it's annoying and pointless when done in EVERY issue.[/QUOTE]
Strife dressed like a lady of the night IMO. Saying she was more presentable than Steve without a shirt seems like a double standard to me.
[QUOTE=Dr. Poison;2535339]I'll agree with you there. The concept of the First Born was flawed in many ways.[/QUOTE]
The concept is completely fine. He's just not a master strategist.
[QUOTE=Dr. Poison;2535342]Strife dressed like a lady of the night IMO. Saying she was more presentable than Steve without a shirt seems like a double standard to me.[/QUOTE]
That's not a double standard at all when Strife IS the goddess of discord, dark chaos, etc...as well as in mythology said to be the daughter of Nyx the goddess of [B]night[/B]
The idea that in a title called Wonder Woman that the male lead is always losing his shirt is funny. Note, GalaxyQuest and the line about always losing his shirt.
If the artists are good, then it is also attractive.
Regarding the character's motivation for not wearing a shirt... Steve is currently being drawn as a bodybuilder. He is certainly not being drawn with a natural musculature. And the truth is that lots of bodybuilders like to go shirtless when they can because it is more comfortable for them (and they are exhibitionists). One of my past flings had a habit of being shirtless at any opportunity. Have you ever seen the old tv show Cheyenne with Clint Walker? Not a show went by without that cowboy takng off his shirt. And we won't even mention Robert Conrad on The Wild Wild West.
The thing is that it is very easy to sexualize a female character in a comic in the eyes of a readership. Twisty poses. Large breasts. Curvy rear. Even as she is fully dressed. It is much harder to do the same thing to a male character. Note Tarzan and the Martian Manhunter. The fact that Scott has done so by simply removing Steve's shirt IS probably exactly the dialogue the creative team wished to create.
[QUOTE=LoveStar;2534867]Characters can be shirtless but do it when it's necessary not because the character needs attention.[/QUOTE]
Why was it necessary for the First Born to be shirtless?
[QUOTE=LoveStar;2535362]That's not a double standard at all when Strife IS the goddess of discord, dark chaos, etc...as well as in mythology said to be the daughter of Nyx the goddess of [B]night[/B][/QUOTE]
I meant that Strife was dressed like a hooker.
[QUOTE=Dr. Poison;2535052]That's exactly it. Why would the First Born wear pants and a cloak but NOT a shirt? It makes no sense at all. He should have been totally naked like you said given that he was raised by hyenas.[/QUOTE]
Likely because it was a trophy more than essential gear to him... like he actually did kill that dragon in full commando.
As for not armoring his chest... I kinda think he is going by the same logic that Batman is with his symbol... they both wanted their opponents to focus their efforts on the most heavily armored parts of their bodies. Ofc the FB wasn't armored at all there, but it is worth remembering the human ribcage is there to act as natural protection for our heart and lungs.
Also there is the purely symbolic aspect of him wearing it like that: Because Hercules is often depicted in a similar fashion with the lion cloak as the only protection for his upper body. And its just a case of one-upmanship that has the FB use a dragon-cloak instead of a lion.
[QUOTE=Outside_85;2535915]Likely because it was a trophy more than essential gear to him... like he actually did kill that dragon in full commando.
As for not armoring his chest... I kinda think he is going by the same logic that Batman is with his symbol... they both wanted their opponents to focus their efforts on the most heavily armored parts of their bodies. Ofc the FB wasn't armored at all there, but it is worth remembering the human ribcage is there to act as natural protection for our heart and lungs.
Also there is the purely symbolic aspect of him wearing it like that: Because Hercules is often depicted in a similar fashion with the lion cloak as the only protection for his upper body. And its just a case of one-upmanship that has the FB use a dragon-cloak instead of a lion.[/QUOTE]
It still doesn't make sense for him to leave his chest bare.
[QUOTE=Doctor Bifrost;2535437]Why was it necessary for the First Born to be shirtless?[/QUOTE]
He is basically an angrier Conan the Barbarian. It's a trope.
Ideally, the majority of WW's villains would be gender tropes with too much political power for their environment.
[QUOTE=Dr. Poison;2536320]It still doesn't make sense for him to leave his chest bare.[/QUOTE]
Depends what 'sense' includes in the FB's head. In our heads he should ofc protect that bit, in his however it may be something else thats at play... like bravado; that he doesn't think anyone can really hurt him anyways, or perhaps he just doesn't like not being exposed to the elements.
So... we got a date for the [I]Year One[/I] trade. [URL="http://www.dccomics.com/blog/2017/01/17/dc-entertainment-announces-free-comic-book-day-2017-offerings"]May 3 it is[/URL] :)
[QUOTE=Doctor Bifrost;2535437]Why was it necessary for the First Born to be shirtless?[/QUOTE]
Just shirtless? I thought the bloke was straight up nude and.... Skinless at one point?
[QUOTE=Javier Velasco;2535396]The idea that in a title called Wonder Woman that the male lead is always losing his shirt is funny. Note, GalaxyQuest and the line about always losing his shirt.
If the artists are good, then it is also attractive.
Regarding the character's motivation for not wearing a shirt... Steve is currently being drawn as a bodybuilder. He is certainly not being drawn with a natural musculature. And the truth is that lots of bodybuilders like to go shirtless when they can because it is more comfortable for them (and they are exhibitionists). One of my past flings had a habit of being shirtless at any opportunity. Have you ever seen the old tv show Cheyenne with Clint Walker? Not a show went by without that cowboy takng off his shirt. And we won't even mention Robert Conrad on The Wild Wild West.
The thing is that it is very easy to sexualize a female character in a comic in the eyes of a readership. Twisty poses. Large breasts. Curvy rear. Even as she is fully dressed. It is much harder to do the same thing to a male character. Note Tarzan and the Martian Manhunter. The fact that Scott has done so by simply removing Steve's shirt IS probably exactly the dialogue the creative team wished to create.[/QUOTE]
Good points.
[QUOTE=Joao;2538605]So... we got a date for the [I]Year One[/I] trade. [URL="http://www.dccomics.com/blog/2017/01/17/dc-entertainment-announces-free-comic-book-day-2017-offerings"]May 3 it is[/URL] :)[/QUOTE]
I want an ABSOLUTE edition! PLEEEEEAASSSSSSE!!!!!
[QUOTE=Joao;2538605]So... we got a date for the [I]Year One[/I] trade. [URL="http://www.dccomics.com/blog/2017/01/17/dc-entertainment-announces-free-comic-book-day-2017-offerings"]May 3 it is[/URL] :)[/QUOTE]
But it says it is only 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10. Which includes the inessential Cheetah backstory, and excludes the last two issues. I hope that solicit is wrong. Wonder Woman Year One should be sold like Batman and Green Arrow and Batgirl/Robin Year One - as a complete story, a jumping on point for new readers. Splitting it in bits and adding the Cheetah backstory is just...pointless.
[QUOTE=millernumber1;2541020]But it says it is only 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10. Which includes the inessential Cheetah backstory, and excludes the last two issues. I hope that solicit is wrong. Wonder Woman Year One should be sold like Batman and Green Arrow and Batgirl/Robin Year One - as a complete story, a jumping on point for new readers. Splitting it in bits and adding the Cheetah backstory is just...pointless.[/QUOTE]
I checked [URL="https://www.amazon.com/Wonder-Woman-Vol-Year-Rebirth/dp/1401268803/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1484844820&sr=8-2-fkmr0&keywords=wonder+woman+vol+2+year+one"]amazon[/URL] and it says #2, #4, #6, #8, #10, #12, #14. I HOPE IT THEY'RE RIGHT.
[QUOTE=Joao;2541041]I checked [URL="https://www.amazon.com/Wonder-Woman-Vol-Year-Rebirth/dp/1401268803/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1484844820&sr=8-2-fkmr0&keywords=wonder+woman+vol+2+year+one"]amazon[/URL] and it says #2, #4, #6, #8, #10, #12, #14. I HOPE IT THEY'RE RIGHT.[/QUOTE]
I hope they cut out the Cheetah issue. That mars an otherwise excellent 6-part arc.
[QUOTE=millernumber1;2541180]I hope they cut out the Cheetah issue. That mars an otherwise excellent 6-part arc.[/QUOTE]
Oh, I like the Barbara issue so much! Probably building up to her transformation later on the run, so I think it's important to be there. I just wish they put it as the last issue so it doesn't get on the way of the main story.
[QUOTE=Joao;2541235]Oh, I like the Barbara issue so much! Probably building up to her transformation later on the run, so I think it's important to be there. I just wish they put it as the last issue so it doesn't get on the way of the main story.[/QUOTE]
I think it makes more sense as part of the Lies arc. And I think including it really weakens the strength of Year One. It's not bad, but...I miss Diana in it too much :)
[QUOTE=millernumber1;2541180]I hope they cut out the Cheetah issue. That mars an otherwise excellent 6-part arc.[/QUOTE]
I'm sure it's going to have all the parts. I can't imagine them slipping the last two parts into volume 3, which is "the Truth."
And you'll have to pry that Barbara issue from my cold dead hands. It better be included. :p
[QUOTE=Dr. Poison;2535190]Why armor your groin and legs but not your chest? Makes no sense.....[/QUOTE]
Hercules and Thor Odinson over at Marvel currently go shirtless. Why does Diana wear boots? She doesn't need them.
Well, this was... and with that I mean this whole arc was... was...
Figures, words have failed me once again. Oh, well, I'll let Mr. Sergio Aragones express my honest feelings on Year One:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]44187[/ATTACH]
Ah, Sergio, sometimes I just don't know what I would do without you!
This thread has seen an imho shocking amount of posts dedicated to the frequency of Steve Trevor's shirtless scenes in recent Wonder Woman's stories. And while I don't deny that other people may find [I]that[/I] an issue worthy of being discussed[*], every time my mind goes to this run's Steve Trevor (not very often, actually) I'm baffled by quite different moments starring him. Like the whole of issue #13, where a character that has been shown from his very first panel as devoid of any fault whatsoever spends the entirety of the comic narrating in a dull, melodramatic way how his love for Diana constantly spurs him to be "a better man", whatever that means. Or the fact that in this most recent issue he spends who knows how many hours flying from one end of the world, presumably at supersonic speed, to the other in the arms of Diana without any kind of protecting gear and is still alive by the end of these trips.
[I]But Powertool[/I] -- you'll say -- [I]what about suspension of disbelief?[/I] To which I'll answer that suspension of disbelief is something authors must [U]earn[/U] before it can be invoked. And with an origin story where I can't stop thinking that the events therein depicted are so incongruous that it's easier to think that these are the lies that were boasted about in the concurrent, present-day storyline's story-arc name, rather than the ones from Azzarello's run, I don't see many steps being taken in the right direction. At the very least Rucka could have started with giving the terrible God of War a masterplan that actually made a lick of sense. Because turning the whole planet in a battlefield of nuclear devastation is one thing I could see a power-mad God of War do, releasing gas in large urban centres, chosen without rhyme or reason, to turn some tens of thousands of people (at most) into a murdering mob is what the Joker (or the author writing him) does when he's low on inspiration for his next crime.
[*] For example, how come that Steve's shirt was the only major casualty of an explosion that was powerful enough not just to unhinge an office door but also [I]to bust open concrete walls[/I]? Nevertheless, not a single wound on anybody in that room! For being a God, this Ares sure sucks at dramatic entrances. I've seen scenes of cartoon explosions in [I]Looney Tunes[/I] with ten times the amount of solemnity.