NYCC: Simone, Scott Revamp Red Sonja, Vampirella & Dejah Thoris for Dynamite

[el shah]

but real life women make real life decisions. They want to be sexy for themselves not for you.

Thats fine. I just dont want to be made the villain for finding them sexy and being turned on.

Not to mention the dont constantly twist in backbreaking poses. They dont also were chain binikis in a real fight. an office is not a battlefield.

Says you.

[Nipower888]

Thats fine. I just dont want to be made the villain for finding them sexy and being turned on.



Says you.

You clearly aren't the villain. I'm the villian. I'm the one who wants the less skimpy costumes. I considered a mean sjw femnazi who hate sex and fun. You wanna be turned on read a milo manara comic. Seriously there are plenty of comics that feature "sexy" women. Also a lack of the skimpy costumes doesn't mean it won't be sexy. I hope you don't think that this discussion is hostile or something.

[The_Greatest_Username]

I like the redesigns for Dejah Thoris and Red Sonja, but I'm not feeling the new look for Vampirella. It just doesn't feel like the same character. I think if they ditched the black spandex underneath it and let her hair down it would feel more like the character to me.

[MosSuperman]

Red Sonja- Get rid of the cloak (not a problem if she keeps it).

Deja Thoris- Needs work.

Vampirella- Bad.

[armlessphelan]

As long as the character's personalities stay the same, then I really don't see the problem with new outfits. (Vampirella's blandness and Dejah's ugliness aside.) Unless they do a full Tomb Raider and completely alter the core of these characters, I'm probably gonna keep Sonja and maybe pick Vampirella back up.

And Dark Horse/Square-Enix have ruined Lara for me. RUINED. And not because her bust size shrank and she wears more "practical" outfits, but because she's no longer any fun. Top Cow kept her fun.

As for the changing market argument, I can see both sides. Why completely alienate your existing fanbase to appeal to an emerging one? DC did it with Batgirl and saw some moderate success, then did it with a significant portion of the rest of the line (DC You) and it flopped. T&A publishers of old (Top Cow, Zenescope, Aspen) have seen declines in monthly sales and altered their product as a result. Hell, the Top Cow Universe in general is pretty much extinct and it's becoming a science fiction publisher because cheesecake just doesn't sell like it once did. Zenescope is only T&A in the covers: interiors rarely have cheesecake anymore and some outfits have been altered to be less revealing.

Dynamite is just doing what it needs to survive. Gail Simone's run on Red Sonja was a legitimate hit, so they're trying out other things on two other properties. It's not the end of the world. I just hope the books are good. Kate Leth does worry me a bit because she's a graduate of BOOM, and that's a publisher whose writers and artists tend to put me off.

(I hope this comment makes sense because I'm tired and it's late.)

[Dark-Flux]

Well now you CANT pick up that book even if you were in to that. Should cheescake books just not exist?

Sure they can. But it should fit the context of the book. It should be the point of the book. Not something that's just forced into a book thats thematically and from a narrative standpoint meant to about something else entirely.

[MosSuperman]

Sure they can. But it should fit the context of the book. It should be the point of the book. Not something that's just forced into a book thats thematically and from a narrative standpoint meant to about something else entirely.

I don't believe their customes were forced. It can also fit with the context of the books and it has for decades.

[Dark-Flux]

In what possible way does a chainmail bikini and one piece thong suit make sense in the context of those books stories?

[MosSuperman]

In what possible way does a chainmail bikini and one piece thong suit make sense in the context of those books stories?

The same way it works for Conan or how Batman being only a human can still keep up with gods. For being only humans and getting into bloody fights constantly they sure have beautiful faces without any scars. Within the context of the books shouldn't they be bruised up, have scratches, broken nose, etc?

[Dark-Flux]

Sure, but theres a difference between suspension of disbelief when it comes to characters suffering injuries in superhero titles (which is a practical issue - its a pain for artists to consistently render smaller details between panels) and choosing to dress or pose a character in a sexually suggestive manner when whatever scenario theyre in has no logical requirement for sexual content. Thats when it starts to become an issue of sexual objectification.

[Wulf1984]

Sure, but theres a difference between suspension of disbelief when it comes to characters suffering injuries in superhero titles (which is a practical issue - its a pain for artists to consistently render smaller details between panels) and choosing to dress or pose a character in a sexually suggestive manner when whatever scenario theyre in has no logical requirement for sexual content. Thats when it starts to become an issue of sexual objectification.

Depends on one's suspension of disbelief. Some fans can have fun with the fictional characters that they read every month, others take everything ultra seriously.

As far as my stance on the situation, I don't think EVERY hero or heroine needs to wear a swimsuit. By that same token, not everyone should be covered from head to toe.

I'm also against changing something well established to cater to "new customers", who didn't care about the book before. If you don't like skin in comics, a Tarzan comic isn't going to be your cup of tea. It's like putting Tarzan in a battlesuit to appeal to the Destiny crowd. I'd rather new fans pick up the book and legitimately fall in love with the characters, than change them up in a more comfortable form.

[Dark-Flux]

Depends on one's suspension of disbelief. Some fans can have fun with the fictional characters that they read every month, others take everything ultra seriously.

But is sexual objectification a valid thing to tolerate in the name of "fun?" Now a book or character can have sex appeal without being sexually exploitative, but that doesnt mean that everything should be free reign under the guise of "its just a joke!" does it?
Taking it to an extreme case a bit, but should racist content be allowed in Marvel/DC books because some readers might find it funny? They'd just shrug and say "lighten up?"

As far as my stance on the situation, I don't think EVERY hero or heroine needs to wear a swimsuit. By that same token, not everyone should be covered from head to toe.

But thats not the situation. Nobodies arguing female characters should be covered head to toe as a rule. None of these new designs do cover the characters head to toe. Theres middle ground between a burka and a swimsuit, but it seems any time that a female character has thie swimsuit replaced with a less revealing outfit its the knee jerk reaction of "PC gone mad! Everybody wearing burkas!"

I'm also against changing something well established to cater to "new customers", who didn't care about the book before. If you don't like skin in comics, a Tarzan comic isn't going to be your cup of tea. It's like putting Tarzan in a battlesuit to appeal to the Destiny crowd. I'd rather new fans pick up the book and legitimately fall in love with the characters, than change them up in a more comfortable form.

Thing is, how many people care about these characters now? I mean Simones Red Sonja (which as a side note; got rid of the rape origin, barely used the bikini etc) did decent numbers, but before that? How much has Vampirella been shifting?
Characters are continually updated to reflect modern times or audiences. Its nothing new. From Batman to Archie and everything in between. The core of Red Sonja or Vampirellas characters (which is what is most important) arnt the bikini and the thong. Thats just window dressing. Now a characters visuals can be an important part of their appeal but its obviously not working in this current state. If thats whats stopping these characters finding a new audience then is in not worth changing things up a bit to find that audience so long as the characterization itself remains consistent?

[Dark-Flux]

Oh, and id also like to thank everybody in that so far we've been able to have a pretty good and open discussion on this without it devolving to insults and petty squabbling. Good job folks!

[MikeMC005]

I hate when things look good and make me want to buy them... I am supposed to be trying to reduce my pull list not make it bigger!!! DAMN YOU!!!!!

[el shah]

But is sexual objectification a valid thing to tolerate in the name of "fun?"

Yes. If its fun its fun. Also sexual objectification is natural. Have you ever had a sexual fantasy? The person or people in your sexual fantasies have no agency. Their objects that you control within your fantasy.

Now a book or character can have sex appeal without being sexually exploitative, but that doesnt mean that everything should be free reign under the guise of "its just a joke!" does it?
Taking it to an extreme case a bit, but should racist content be allowed in Marvel/DC books because some readers might find it funny? They'd just shrug and say "lighten up?"

Apples and Broccoli. Different.

But thats not the situation. Nobodies arguing female characters should be covered head to toe as a rule. None of these new designs do cover the characters head to toe. Theres middle ground between a burka and a swimsuit, but it seems any time that a female character has thie swimsuit replaced with a less revealing outfit its the knee jerk reaction of "PC gone mad! Everybody wearing burkas

These characters were created with revealing outfits. They were created with the male gaze in mind. And theres nothing wrong with that.

Now because of people with an certain agenda theyre covered up. I wonder what the reaction would be if the agenda were different. Say these outfits were redesigned by the Family Research Council or some Fundamentalist Christian org.