Wonder Woman gets new variant cover artist

[vasir12]

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2016/08/...ariant-covers/

Jenny Frison seems like a good choice.

[Thirteen]

Was hoping for Arthur Adams, another artist known for his muscled Amazonian depictions of women.

[SiegePerilous02]

Excellent choice. Her covers for IDW's Angel comic, Vampirella and Red Sonja were all great.

[Dr. Poison]

I'm a little confused here. Jenny's cover for Sensation Comics showed more skin on Diana than any of Frank's recent variant covers for Wonder Woman. Perhaps she's dialing it back a bit for the solo book but if not, Rucka may not care for her covers either.

[Tayswift]

I'm a little confused here. Jenny's cover for Sensation Comics showed more skin on Diana than any of Frank's recent variant covers for Wonder Woman. Perhaps she's dialing it back a bit for the solo book but if not, Rucka may not care for her covers either.

show more skin doesn't mean be more sexualized.

Frison is a far superior cover artist than Cho, he isn't dynamic

[Dr. Poison]

show more skin doesn't mean be more sexualized.

Frison is a far superior cover artist than Cho, he isn't dynamic

That Sensation Comics cover that Jenny did shows a lot more of Diana's thigh than I would care to see on a regular basis.

[Natamaxxx]

show more skin doesn't mean be more sexualized.

Frison is a far superior cover artist than Cho, he isn't dynamic

Cho's covers for this book were never sexualized.

[Maxpower00044]

show more skin doesn't mean be more sexualized.

Frison is a far superior cover artist than Cho, he isn't dynamic

Not even close. Cho's covers are so much better than what they have in that article.

Not one of Cho's covers were overly sexualized. How about that cover for Rucka's Wonder Woman collection? You're gonna try and tell me that that's not sexualized/less sexualized than the Frank Cho cover?

[DisneyWWfan]

show more skin doesn't mean be more sexualized.

Frison is a far superior cover artist than Cho, he isn't dynamic

I'm afraid I don't understand your view on the subject. First I want to stress that I'm not disliking this artists work, nor was I that offended by anything Cho had done with his covers. The image that has recently been unveiled as the newest variant, thought an attractive and well crafted piece of artwork, far more centers on Diana's body then what Cho did. Of all Cho's covers, I found possibly the most recent the most guilty of any problems, and it was just her standing with her back to the viewer. For example, Cho's variant for #4 which was black and white and had all the detauil behind it paid more respect to Diana as a character then this newest one. Cho's image for number 4 showcased the words engraved in the marble as "Seek Peace", "Amazon", and "Prepare For War." Those words and the artwork are not in any way dwelling on her body, but her heritage. Also the greek Angelic (possibly Aphrodite and Athena) figures, as well as the olive crown, the dove flying overhead. Nothing about that cover is sexualized. It's actually displaying the character and what she stands for monumentally better then the one recently displayed.

I want to say right now, I'm going to be critical of the newest image, just because I think it's fair, not because I'm actually all that insulted by it. Diana is standing with her face somewhat visible, the main focus of the image is on Diana's chest, her eyelids are closed almost lustfully, her lips are parted, as she holds the magic lasso against her body. Nothing about that image projects power, or wisdom, or compassion, or anything really besides Diana is a gorgeous woman. I don't think it's done in a vulgar or insulting way, but I don't see why one, which is actually showing the character for things besides her beauty is sexualizing her, while another, with her simply standing there, the audience focused directly at her chest, is not? Sexualizing, as far as I know, is where you reduce a person/character into nothing more then an object of lust. I would argue #4's variant cover in no way is doing that, whereas this arguably could be viewed as doing so. We aren't even really certain what Diana is even doing in the current image. It almost looks like she's interacting with someone who isn't shown?

That all being said, I do believe that the new cover artist appears talented, and personally, I like the image as it is a well done piece of artwork. All the image really tells me though, is that Diana is attractive. Not powerful, or compassionate, or intelligent, or skilled, or anything like that.

[brettc1]

show more skin doesn't mean be more sexualized.

Frison is a far superior cover artist than Cho, he isn't dynamic

I disagree. Cho's art on Shanna was dynamic IMO.

[Stanlos]

I was crossing my fingers for Julie Bell or Boris Vallejo but Frison provides great continuity of style with the erstwhile Cho.

[Stormcrow]

Comic Vine has an exclusive first look at Jenny Frison's cover for Wonder Woman #7!

[richalex]

Comic Vine has an exclusive first look at Jenny Frison's cover for Wonder Woman #7!

That is very beautiful and elegant.

[Vanguard-01]

Comic Vine has an exclusive first look at Jenny Frison's cover for Wonder Woman #7!

Preeetty! *Wipes chin. *

[rayray1127]

Comic Vine has an exclusive first look at Jenny Frison's cover for Wonder Woman #7!

DARN IT! Looks like I will have to CONTINUE buying the variants with the regulars! That is just WAAAAAY to gorgeous for me not to own!