LOOK: Frank Miller's "Dark Knight III" Wonder Woman is Armed for Battle

[borntohula]

Haha. Looks a bit mad innit? A bit like the Superman cover, "funny looking". I'm thinking it looks funny because it's meant as such.

Btw Miller drawing anatomy that doesn't match up isn't something new.

Here's a pin up he did for Judge Dredd. Meant for a cover (which went unused).

I'll be skipping this.

Miller is not on art duty in TDKIII other than the Atom mini comic (which btw looks really good) as of yet. No worries

[Dr. Poison]

Wow. Every new piece of art from Miller is a glorious trainwreck.

This about sums up my feelings. This piece is overly sexualized trash.

[borntohula]

Btw, what's so "sexualized" about it? That her arms are thicker than her bum? That there isn't any back breaking T'n'A?

While the pose looks a bit off (again, I don't think Miller is being too serious with either this piece, or the Superman cover), I've seen much worse lately.

[Agent Z]

Btw, what's so "sexualized" about it? That her arms are thicker than her bum? That there isn't any back breaking T'n'A?

While the pose looks a bit off (again, I don't think Miller is being too serious with either this piece, or the Superman cover), I've seen much worse lately.

Ehem.

The corset looking like it's about to tear and the emphasis on her ass are pretty sexualized.

And honestly, "he's not being serious" really doesn't seem like a good excuse for this art.

[numberthirty]

Btw, what's so "sexualized" about it?

I was thinking the same thing. While I do think it is on that end of the spectrum, it's pretty tame compared to some of what's in the current run.

[borntohula]

The corset looking like it's about to tear and the emphasis on her ass are pretty sexualized.

And honestly, "he's not being serious" really doesn't seem like a good excuse for this art.

I'm not excusing Miller's art because some doesn't take liking to it. I'm just interested in how the poster is sexualizing Diana.

So the corset is basically a corset. As for her behind, what about it? While she puts on a pout, it's not much worse than the one on the album cover of Springsteen's Born in the USA.

Personally, I chuckled a bit when I first saw it, which I think probably was the intention. Just as with his Superman cover (with the big hands and junk swinging).

I was thinking the same thing. While I do think it is on that end of the spectrum, it's pretty tame compared to some of what's in the current run.

I'd say it's more or less nothing. Alot of hate for a silly looking poster.

[Largo161]

@borntohula
I'm not reading the current run and don't know what the Finches are doing in general, but I'm just wondering if you included that panel above in this thread because it's your idea of a sexualized Diana?

[borntohula]

@borntohula
I'm not reading the current run and don't know what the Finches are doing in general, but I'm just wondering if you included that panel above in this thread because it's your idea of a sexualized Diana?

No.

I was doing a google on Finch Wonder Woman, and that showed up. It made me chuckle, so I posted it.

But I removed the picture shortly afterwards, since I don't want to pit Miller's art versus Finch's. That's just infectious and will turn the thread into the usual debate on the sexiest WW drawings.

Sorry if that's what the thread will turn into.

[Tayswift]

I'm not excusing Miller's art because some doesn't take liking to it. I'm just interested in how the poster is sexualizing Diana.

So the corset is basically a corset. As for her behind, what about it? While she puts on a pout, it's not much worse than the one on the album cover of Springsteen's Born in the USA.

Personally, I chuckled a bit when I first saw it, which I think probably was the intention. Just as with his Superman cover (with the big hands and junk swinging).



I'd say it's more or less nothing. Alot of hate for a silly looking poster.

you know that bruce is a real man, with agency that posed to that disco. wonder owman is a character with no agency, that was drawn like that by a man. it is much worse and different situation. Again one wrong, doesn't make another wrong to be right

it is heavily sexualized the way she poses, and we only see her behind and part of her face. it is one of the oldest sexualization technics

[Aioros22]

This talk about sexualizing when Dick Grayson is showing butts all around on his comic every issue. But hey, he`s an acrobat.

Drawing is fine. Not hot about the legs, tho, they seem overlystylized, but that`s Miller style curently, so I`m not shocked or surprised.

[borntohula]

you know that bruce is a real man, with agency that posed to that disco. wonder owman is a character with no agency, that was drawn like that by a man. it is much worse and different situation. Again one wrong, doesn't make another wrong to be right

it is heavily sexualized the way she poses, and we only see her behind and part of her face. it is one of the oldest sexualization technics

Well, I meant it as "a pout, it's not much worse than the one on the album cover of...", pout measurement or what to call it. Wasn't meant to try to make some point about men being portrayed as "this or that" in comics.

Regardless, you've now written "it is heavily sexualized the way she poses, and we only see her behind and part of her face. it is one of the oldest sexualization technics". Not sure I agree, but it's interesting to read what you mean

[Dr. Poison]

While I can't speak for anyone else, what I find to be overly sexualized about this piece is:


1.) The amount of skin visible.

2.) The pose emphasizes the buttocks.

3.) The use of fishnets in the "costume".


While none of these alone would probably make me think of the drawing as overly sexualized, the combination of the 3 definitely do. It's probably a good thing that Miller didn't use the double "W" insignia in his design or some people may have thought it stood for "Wonder Whore".

[numberthirty]

Maybe we should just dress her up like a nun. That would nip that "Exposed Flesh/Fishnets" thing right in the bud.

[friendly-fire-press]

His style is obviously very divisive. I like it because it is so extremely unusual and unorthodox. From DKSA to today, it's almost like his vision incorporates elements of Surrealism or even Futurism, breaking every rule in the technique book, you know?

Don't get me wrong, I don't think I can look at his art on a regular basis -- it's just too exhausting! -- but whenever I do I have fun analyzing it (his pictures demand analysis!) ... ie What's going through this artist's mind? Is he tortured or playful or both?

Anyway, it's very fascinating IMO

[Nick Miller]

So what if it's overly sexualized?

That's his interpretation of Diana

And that's how she and many women dominate men.

Marston would be proud