InsaneJournal

Tweak says, "Belly!!!!!!"

bluefall (bluefall) wrote in scans_daily,
@ 2009-04-10 13:12:00

Entry tags:

char: wonder woman/diana of themyscira, creator: ben caldwell, title: wednesday comics

Wednesday Wonder Woman
Ben Caldwell, who's working on the Wondy segment of the upcoming Wednesday Comics weekly, has been posting art teases at his blog. There's some fairly cool stuff and some vague suggestions of plot as well.

Looks like the first villain will be Dr Poison. Callback, there - she was Diana's very first costume foe in the Golden Age as well.

Though we're doing post-Crisis relaunch throwbacks as well:

Don't mind me, I'll just be over here facepalming for a minute.

Looking pretty good, at any rate. I'm starting to look forward to this title.

(Post a new comment)

	seriousfic 2009-04-10 01:06 pm UTC (link)
	Though we're doing post-Crisis relaunch throwbacks as well: ~~Is this in post-IC continuity or some new continuity altogether?~~ HOTTTT. (Reply to this)

	gargoylekitty 2009-04-10 01:11 pm UTC (link)
	Completely digging this style(especially the color, nom) and am just going to ignore that little Supes bit in order to retain my happiness for this. (Reply to this)

	morgana006 2009-04-10 01:18 pm UTC (link)
	The art is pretty awesome. And I really like Dr. Poison's look. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	darklorelei 2009-04-10 01:34 pm UTC (link)
	Motto. And the coloring is super snazzy. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	jeyl 2009-04-10 01:23 pm UTC (link)
	Is that Diana doing that kiss sketch? Please tell me that's not Diana kissing some macho looking guy in that sketch. (Reply to this) (Thread)

statham1986
2009-04-10 01:33 pm UTC (link)

I don't have a problem with Diana kissing someone, or having a proper relationship with a guy. I think Gail Simone said in one interview that the idea that Wonder Woman was celibate or whatever was pretty ridiculous, or something along those lines, at least.

What I do have an issue with is the fact it's Superman. Unless it's some kind of flashback, completely out of continuity, or there's something happening to the SuperMarraige that we haven't been clued into, it's been done to death as an idea, and not particularly well, unfortunately.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	jeyl 2009-04-10 02:46 pm UTC (link)
	Oh well. i best not judge before all the facts are in. Still recovering from the Steve/Diana romance from the Wonder Woman movie. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	bluefall 2009-04-10 02:52 pm UTC (link)
	Wednesday Comics will not be in continuity, as I understand it. This is a new telling of Diana's origin and first steps into the world of man. Which doesn't mean the sad cliche of Clark/Diana is any less tired and annoying. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Clark/Diana

kitty_tc_69
2009-04-10 04:37 pm UTC (link)

Am I the only one who gets really bad fanfic vibes off of pairings like Clark/Diana or Bruce/Diana? I mean, sure they're published by the same company and all, but they really weren't at all designed with one another in mind and squashing them together just feels wrong to me. Even the JLA itself has something of an "official crossover" feel to it for me, even though I'm better with that idea than I am most of the major pairing ideas to come from it.

It's much like the Black Panther/Storm relationship in Marvel, it feels forced and inorganic and artificial and wrong. Sure, I like crossover (when done well) as much as anyone, but things like that just stink too badly of metafiction for me. Especially considering they're almost always rushed and awkwardly slapped together without a speck of honest characterization in sight.

Can anyone explain to me what the real chemistry they would have? Any real reason for them to logically get together beyond some author or editor thinking it'd be cool? Is there real substance behind it after all that I'm just not seeing and it's just the execution that's off, or is it really as bad an idea as it seems to me?

[=^.^=]

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Re: Clark/Diana

statham1986
2009-04-11 04:00 am UTC (link)

Personally, I would say it isn't anything like Black Panther/Storm getting married.

Black Panther/Storm had none of the sort of history of working together and being in a team that Clark and Diana have in the DCU, and required a Storm miniseries to retcon in their first meeting and having sex together, as I recall, and then we were put through a bullshit story arc where Hudlin seemingly suggested a number of brides for T'Challa when we all knew it was going to be Ororo.

Given this is out of continuity, this is a chance to concoct some sort of feasible Diana/Clark romance, as much as I'd hate it. It'd just require the right writer to do it. I think it could be a promising idea, but, more often than not, it's been done badly, which naturally puts people off.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Re: Clark/Diana

bluefall
2009-04-11 11:11 am UTC (link)

Thing is, it demonstrates a fundamental miscomprehension of both of their characters to pair them, or even to assume they'd be particularly attracted to each other. Clark is looking for someone normal, and Diana is looking for someone who thinks that she is normal. She's capes and tights and heroics that the simple Kansas farmboy is looking for sanctuary from in his personal life, and he's Man's World to the core and will never begin to understand her world of gods and warriors and royalty.

The longer and better they've known each other, in fact, the less sense it makes.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

	not in the story, yay! perevision 2009-06-29 06:54 am UTC (link)
	I was a bit weirded out too, but Caldwell says it's a much earlier sketch of Clark and Diana that he did as an exercise. So hey, not canon! (Reply to this) (Parent)

	mysteryfan 2009-04-11 10:28 am UTC (link)
	I agree with this comment. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Comment being, since it's way up there...

mysteryfan
2009-04-11 10:31 am UTC (link)

(Reply to this) (Parent)

	sherkahn 2009-04-10 01:35 pm UTC (link)
	That's not just some guy... it's the S-Dude, "Mr. Underwear on the Outside" man (Reply to this) (Parent)

	sistermagpie 2009-04-10 01:24 pm UTC (link)
	I don't know who she is but I like her! (Reply to this)

	jarodrussell 2009-04-10 01:36 pm UTC (link)
	"Dr. Poison wants her prick in you." (Reply to this)

statham1986
2009-04-10 01:40 pm UTC (link)

Doctor Poison looks fantastic. I was never fond of her earlier look, with the perma-grin that made her drool, the gimp-style mask and the black smock or whatever, because she never, ever looked like a viable threat for Diana, who could just loop the lasso around the dolt and that's it, problem solved.

This works so much better for me. The gas-mask brings some real scariness to the design, because you have no idea what she's going to look like underneath it, and the lack of an overcoat/smock/moo moo-thing makes her looks more mobile and more of a threat. I also like the subtle details on her body, and would love to find out what it means - tattoos? An infection?

Despite my concerns about that Supes/Diana set of panels, I'm actually more excited about Wednesday Comics than any of the other weekly-style books. Who knows, this might be the thing that gets me picking up monthly books again?

(Reply to this)

	mullon 2009-04-10 01:46 pm UTC (link)
	Finally, Dr. Poison is getting to do something. I've been waiting years for someone to do something with her. I thought she was going to have a big thing in Lo3W, but they didn't do anything. I thought she was going to have a big part in the Genocide thing, but she didn't do anything. But I miss the coat. And the rictus. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	bluefall 2009-04-10 02:53 pm UTC (link)
	I don't care for the rictus, it's a bit too faux-Joker for me, but she totally needs the coat. Coat + gasmask would be double-plus creepy, too. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	bluejaybirdie 2009-04-10 03:42 pm UTC (link)
	Motto. It would be the stuff of nightmares. Like a doctor gone wrong...shudder double-plus creepy Out of curiosity, have you read 1984 recently? (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	bluefall 2009-04-10 05:20 pm UTC (link)
	Heh. Does ten years ago count as recently? Motto. It would be the stuff of nightmares. Like a doctor gone wrong... Are you my mummy? (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

bluejaybirdie
2009-04-10 05:30 pm UTC (link)

Oh my holy God, that was creepy. And to think I thought gas masks were funny when I was little because they made people look like elephants...

Man, you still remember the doublespeak from ten years ago? I read it this year in Sophomore English and don't think to use it in casual conversation without being reminded in someway of Big Brother or something. That's pretty amazing.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	darklorelei 2009-04-10 05:41 pm UTC (link)
	I actually used "doubleplusungood" just the other day. If you read it more than once, it tends to slip into your vocabulary. Oooor I'm a nerd. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

bluejaybirdie
2009-04-10 05:48 pm UTC (link)

In conversation or in writing? I have no idea how the heck you would spit that word out without tripping over it.

Still, I get what you mean about vocabulary from books slipping into your conciousness. I'm enough of an oddball/geek that I pick up the patterns in the writing and then think/speak in the writing style for a while. It's a great boredom reliever in class (once, my best friend and I talked in third person narrative for a week straight. Drove our poor teacher up the wall).

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	darklorelei 2009-04-10 06:10 pm UTC (link)
	In conversation! I talk really quickly anyways, so it's not really that much of a struggle. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	gargoylekitty 2009-04-10 07:22 pm UTC (link)
	Damn overuse of gasmasks in art/pin-up makes me see the coat + gasmask as anything but creepy and instead quite the sexy combination. Well that or this one girl I dated briefly who had liked to wear a gasmask from time to time. A bit cumbersome and in the way yet aesthetically awesome. (Reply to this) (Parent)

bluejaybirdie
2009-04-10 03:41 pm UTC (link)

Does anyone else think that Dr. Poison looks like she could be really young? I mean, she looks about my age. Judging by that full-body sketch, I'd say she wasn't older then fifteen or sixteen. Plus, it's not like anyone could see her face under the mask. Maybe the plot point is that she's young but no one knows. Or maybe I'm just grasping at straws. I just think she looks really small and thin for an adult woman.

Here's to hoping the Clark/Diana kiss is brought about by an aphrodisiac poison by Dr. Poison. Hey, stranger things have happened!

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	neuhallidae 2009-04-10 03:56 pm UTC (link)
	She could just be short. Although it would amuse the hell out of me if she dresses young to confuse/creep people out. Short adorable thing with a gas mask and a giant needle ready to do horrible, horrible things to people? Always fun. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	bluejaybirdie 2009-04-10 04:02 pm UTC (link)
	It wasn't the height (or lack thereof) that threw me, its the almost complete lack of curves. She's got no hips and doesn't look bigger then an A-cup. Which can happen in adult women, but you certainly don't see it happen too much in comics. Plus, she's wearing sofies. I've yet to see a woman past the age of 25ish wear sophies. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	neuhallidae 2009-04-10 04:13 pm UTC (link)
	Personal anecdote doesn't equal statistics, I know, but I stand by my opinion, since my roommate of almost two years was 5'3", boy-skinny, and had to wear clothes and shoes made for girls of 10-14 years because "grown up" clothes fell off her if she didn't alter them. And she turned 24 this year. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	bluejaybirdie 2009-04-10 04:31 pm UTC (link)
	Oh, I get that, I'm built like your roomate. 5'6", thin, and curveless. I'm sixteen but I have to shop in the children's section for bathing suits that don't fall off. I was just very surprised to see someone of that body type in comics, of all places. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	kitty_tc_69 2009-04-10 04:43 pm UTC (link)
	I'd say that would either be a function of extremely stylized art, or the sad infection of comics with the the hollywood and modeling industry "heroin scarecrow" ideal of femininity. I sure as hell hope it's the former. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	bluejaybirdie 2009-04-10 04:50 pm UTC (link)
	See, I was kinda thinking it was a good thing to see some body types besides the standard "big boobs, huge ass" model. As a girl who gets teased quite often for being small and skinny, it's nice to see someone with a slightly more realistic body type. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

kitty_tc_69
2009-04-10 05:05 pm UTC (link)

I don't for a moment condone people treating you poorly for any reason, you probably recognize that the curveless, hyperthin "ideal" of femininity is pushed entirely too much in our culture, to the point where women have their self-esteems destroyed and are targets of abuse and ridicule for being built like a woman instead of a ten-year-old boy. And it's not just plus-sized women who bear the brunt of this, it's gotten to the point where women once considered normal or even highly attractive now fall outside this extremely narrow standard of beauty that seems to exist solely to demonize the feminine body shape and replace it with an ideal more suited to pre-pubescent children.

For example, Marilyn Monroe, once an icon of perfection and still lauded as a legendary sex symbol, would now be considered far too "fat" for a modeling career. Kate Winslet, whose proportions are similar and who has quite an amazing body by any reasonable standard, was ridiculed incessantly for the sin of having curves.

If you feel bad about your body, I suggest looking into a modeling career. Talent scouts are looking for people just like you to put on magazine covers and catwalks in the highest echelons of the fashion industry. You'll not only be told constantly how perfect you are, but you'll also be well paid for it.

Women with curves, however, need not apply. And that's not just sad, it's wrong.

[=^.^=]

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

bluejaybirdie
2009-04-10 05:42 pm UTC (link)

See, here's the funny thing: I'm too short to be a model. Plus, I've got no interest. I've always been a bit of a tomboy. But my best friend Kayla was almost a model. She's 5'9" and plus-size. She decided that she didn't want to be told what to do so much though, so she decided not to do it (there were financial reasons too). So, I think it swings both ways. I don't think it's a healthy industry in any way, shape, or form however. Being pushed all the time to be perfect has got to do something to you.

I agree with you that Hollywood has gotten insane over the whole waif-thin ideal. I think some of the more gorgeous women out there are the ones with some meat on their bones. But what really bothers me is the impossible ideal: tiny waist, thin arms and legs, big boobs, and a big butt. Short of plastic surgery, it's just not gonna happen. If you're thin enough to have a flat stomach and skinny limbs, you aren't going to have very many curves. If you have nice boobs and a good butt, you aren't going to have a perfectly flat stomach. It's lose-lose, no matter what size you are.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

kitty_tc_69
2009-04-10 06:13 pm UTC (link)

I could hardly agree with you any more, very nice post. I think you nailed what's wrong with the whole thing, and why so many women of all types tear themselves apart and even kill themselves over an "ideal" that just isn't uncommon, it's entirely unrealistic if not impossible.

Which is the way they want it, I guess. It's hard to commoditize what isn't rare, that's simple economics. So, they push an impossible ideal, and select the ultrarare few who can be modified to fit it so that they can mine them for the artificial value in their rarity. And if their ideal suddenly became the norm, they'd probably change it.

I guess what you've pointed out is that the industry isn't about beauty, much less any kind of caring about the consequences of their image-mongering on real women, they're about profit. Which only reinforces my original point that it's sad that so many women judge themselves so harshly against their standard.

Great post. Like I said, I think you nailed some serious truth. :)

(Reply to this) (Parent)

	schmevil 2009-04-10 06:39 pm UTC (link)
	The funny thing about plus size modeling is that a lot of the girls are just barely plus sized. I was tapped to do plus size modeling when I was a size 14 tall. I was shopping in regular stores, occasionally wearing size large shirts, and I was considered suitable for plus size modeling. facepalm (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	kitty_tc_69 2009-04-10 07:59 pm UTC (link)
	That's really sad, and you're right. A size 14 is very close to average, if not a little smaller, and yet the fashion industry wants to pretend 90% of women in the country are somehow abnormal. On the other hand, congrats on the modeling gig. Even with the industry as screwed up as it is, it's gotta be nice to be offered a job based on being pretty. :) (Reply to this) (Parent)

	bluefall 2009-04-10 05:26 pm UTC (link)
	It's less the body type to me, although she is pretty skinny even by the stylized standards of this art, and more the choice of clothing - she's got a sort of garish eclecticness to her that seems unusual even by costumed baddie standards, for an adult. Though I imagine she is pretty young if she's Diana's age, since the Diana here is quite young as well. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	foxhack 2009-04-11 12:25 am UTC (link)
	Not only that, but that full-body tattoo really bugs the crap outta me. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	sailorlibra 2009-04-10 05:15 pm UTC (link)
	I have a bad case of be careful what you wish for. I was really hoping some members of the JLA would show up in this comic, so the Diana/JLA bond could be strengthened. But I didn't want this. Next time I'm putting footnotes on my wishes. (Reply to this)

	batcookies 2009-04-11 12:23 am UTC (link)
	The sort of writer that would pair up Diana and Superman is not the sort of writer that should be reintroducing people to Dr. Poison. I won't be buying this. On a related note, "are you my mummy?" (Reply to this) (Thread)

	foxhack 2009-04-11 12:29 am UTC (link)
	Has it been officially stated that they're going to pair them up or something? Because it may just be an art tease, or a sketch. :p (Reply to this) (Parent)

	jupiterrhode 2009-04-12 07:24 pm UTC (link)
	Okay, fuck the whole Superman thing. I'm more concerned about the pre-crisis tiara she's sporting here. I think the double points look so much better. (Reply to this)

bencaldwell
2009-04-20 12:25 pm UTC (link)

howdy!

i've had trouble getting onto the site for a few days, but i thought it might be polite to answer a few comments/questions...

1 - WW+SM= well, i can't tell you what they do or don't do, but i can tell you that i abhor random hookups of vaguely-but-not-really-compatible characters who happen to be in the same general vicinity. well, it's AWESOME when it happens on gossip girl, but that's about it.

i may or may not be a good writer, but i never have characters do something "just because" -- either something is characteristic of them, or it is not. when this story is done, that image and its place in the story will make perfect sense, and no one will be disappointed. except maybe jupiterrhode. if that one sketch of the tiara turns you off because it lacks the double points, it's safe to day there are a lot of other things that will bug you soooo much more. fair warning!

2 - when i did WW children's books several years ago, half of the people hated that i made diana so thin. they thought i was lauding paris hilton etc and promoting bad body imagery. the other half loved that i showed young diana with a young body, and not a playmate physique. there's no right or wrong, but "pleasing everyone is a noble goal... for a concierge". it is what it is.

as a non-moron and father of 2 daughters, i can only do my best to treat each character as an individual and draw them accordingly. while many artists draw WW as a porn star and seemingly get bonus pay for every pose where she is pushing both her chest AND her rear in your face, i tried to emphasize a lean and athletic frame that seemed appropriate for her age. (in this story of her early years.) i didn't draw her like a tank because she doesn't have that sort of personality. (after all, if i were drawing SM and BM together, i would certainly give them different builds because both their personalities and their physical approach to problems is so characteristically different.) in fact, while everyone has their own opinion, i would suggest that a bulldozer WW is antithetical -- it assumes that strength, power and heroism are directly related to the size of your deltoids. diana's athleticism and brains are as much or more a part of her overall "strength" as her weightlifting abilities.

i also hate the fact that most comic artists give every female the exact same body (occasionally interspersed with a "fat" or "old" variant). which leads me to...

(Reply to this) (Thread)

bencaldwell
2009-04-20 12:26 pm UTC (link)

3 - dr poison is easily one of the most awesome and neglected supervillains ever. it's insulting. i decided early on that WWs principal foes would all be existing characters... and women. if WW is a role model for a positive feminine ideal, can't her enemies be equally strong models of a negative? her three foes have distinct personalities, motives, and bodies. only one of them has the typical va-voom comic body (cheetah), because that fits her rather vain, narcissistic and flamboyant personality.

i made dr poison freakishly lean and androgynous because she is one of the most self-negating characters in comics. there is nothing either soft or sexy about her personality. (although ironically, some people think that my DP drawings are a cheap attempt to sex up the character, so oh well...) she's covered in punctures and scratches and bandages because she does terrible things to herself, and she wears a minimum of utilitarian clothes because she doesn't give a shit about anything that doesn't directly aid in her overwhelming obsession. she has tattoos because she is a member of the ultra-nationalist japanese "black dragon" society, with extensive links to the yakuza (and yes, there was a real BLS which engaged in espionage and terrorism on imperial japan's behalf from the late 1800s to WW2). her hair is japanese cutie-pie because a) she is japanese and b) there is nothing more disturbing than something that should be cute and happy sticking needles in you eye. it's a matter of taste, but to me the rictus and trench coat screamed "if you hop a time machine to mid-1994 then i am going to scare the crap out of you". might as well give her twirly mustaches and a black hat.

i didn't give dr poison a specific age, but she is supposed to be pretty young. she is ruthless and callous in the way that only a young, rootless person with ideological nightmares can be. a sort of purified embodiment of totalitarianism, who doesn't care what she breaks or even if she survives. so you can imagine she and diana have a lot to chat about...

sailor libra - it is true, fortune is cruel!

batcookies - i would say don't pre-judge it, but frankly what do i care? that's sort of what the internet is for. and google maps.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

jupiterrhode
2009-07-10 11:39 pm UTC (link)

My distaste of the double points comes in because it's a pre-crisis throw-back, and the less said about pre-crisis Wondy the better. George Perez was the best thing to happen to the character since her creation, and there is almost nothing from before his reboot that is worth salvaging. I am concerned, therefore, whenever I see pre-crisis bits that more pre-crisis bits will follow.

It's not because I'm a stickler for Diana's usual image, far from it. If you could give her a costume that makes sense, is aesthetically pleasing, and covers her like armor is supposed to I might weep in public.

(Reply to this) (Parent)