|
Zamboni Apocalypse posted:Heh, thought I could find it. Tigra: "It could be worse". 
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 01:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 19:12 |
|
|
Say Nothing posted:Tigra: "It could be worse." Madam not-appearing-in-marvel-movies there hasn't had a costume change in forever has she? I'd be interested to see what they'd do to her to make her more movie ready (like it looks like they're doing with Spider-woman). Has Tigra even done anything to make her self special enough to warrent being in a movie, besides be slightly more modest that DC's Cheetah?
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 02:33
|
|
|
She appealed to the furry contingent before they were well-known, she was a good power substitute for Beast when he wasn't on the team, she's become the go-to "slut" of the Avengers roster since the She-Hulk/Juggernaut fiasco of the early 00s, and that's pretty much all I can think of. I dig the gently caress out of the new Spider-Woman outfit. She was three motherfucking decades overdue for a redesign and the new one is far better than I could have hoped for.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 05:46
|
|
|
I like it, but I kind of wish the yellow shapes were either bigger, as a more obvious design nod to the original costume, or higher up, to resemble a cute necktie motif. But generally, I like it. It reminds me of the modern Mockingbird, Captain Marvel, and Batgirl redesigns.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 13:12
|
|
|
I didn't like the old costume at all but this one doesn't click with me immediately. Interested to see how other artists interprete it. I felt the same way about Cap Marvel at first too and now looking back it was an A++ change.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 13:33
|
|
|
I think it's one that is eventually going to end up as dated but really, anything is better than her old one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 13:57
|
|
|
Anora posted:Madam not-appearing-in-marvel-movies there hasn't had a costume change in forever has she? Weird how her costume hasn't changed at all since the 70s. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 03:51
|
|
|
I honestly think cinematic Beast has been awful looking but they could just make a character like Tigra fully CG like the characters in Avatar and it would look so much better.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 04:14
|
|
|
look at those eyes... fozzy fosbourne posted:I honestly think cinematic Beast has been awful looking but they could just make a character like Tigra fully CG like the characters in Avatar and it would look so much better. Rocket looked good on film, so it's plausible, I just hope they do something if they plan to use her.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 05:31
|
|
|
I like the new outfit because it reads as an espionage character. The retractable gliders in particular are very James Bondy. She's a character who can go into a nightclub without anyone ever knowing she's a superheroine until it's time for her to be a superheroine.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 21:38
|
|
|
ChickenSuit posted:It's good because it actually seems like something that could be worn while still looking like a superhero. Gonna have to disagree with you there. It looks like something you could wear but unlike the new Batgirl costume (despite the crap I gave the snap on cape lampshade) it doesn't look like a superhero costume.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 21:42
|
|
|
SirDan3k posted:Gonna have to disagree with you there. It looks like something you could wear but unlike the new Batgirl costume (despite the crap I gave the snap on cape lampshade) it doesn't look like a superhero costume. Well I'll say that I like it precisely because it doesn't look like a superhero costume. It looks like a Secret Agent/Superhero costume, which is what Spider-Woman actually is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 21:51
|
|
|
It's a decent costume, but if it's supposed to be something that isn't a uniform it's failed completely. Unless there are a lot of retarded goons in the employment of hydra who all go "Hey, scope that chick dressed like spider woman and wearing her sunglasses indoors."
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 03:14
|
|
|
It seems like it borrows some visual cues from recent superhero animated series. Like, I can totally imagine a matching set of costumes with a similar style on a Young Avengers Academy show or something. Maybe Hawkguy a little bit, too. Her old costume was kind of ridiculous but mostly just because guys couldn't resist drawing gigantic boob socks to take advantage of the framing of the logo. That and that notorious butt cleavage. It's like if people drew Spider-man's junk clinging to his leg, clearly outlined, then of course that costume would be inappropriate, too. I think the new costume is ok, the old costume was kind of neat but was too tempting for cheesecake, and the new costume seems like it might feel dated soon in the same way that stuff like Impulse or the Jacket Avengers do. Edit: I like Captain Marvel's recent costume more Edit: the elephant in the room also seems to be that she is often depicted with huge boobs; google image search spider-woman and try to find images where she doesn't have humongous boobs, even by cape comic book standards. This image is a little more modest and it's buried:  And it's ironically by Greg Land, so it's probably a trace of a real porn star. In other words, people generally decided to draw Jessica Drew much more titillating than Greg Land tracing real porn stars  Edit3: for comparison, google image search Captain Marvel google image search Wonder Woman fozzy fosbourne fucked around with this message at 04:38 on Dec 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 04:15
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:It seems like it borrows some visual cues from recent superhero animated series. Like, I can totally imagine a matching set of costumes with a similar style on a Young Avengers Academy show or something. Maybe Hawkguy a little bit, too. Compare Spider-Girl as depicted in her own series, where she appears reasonably sensibly-proportioned for a athletic teenager without being titillating:  Of course, then Coipel (who is otherwise a good artist) got his hands on her for Spider-Verse.  What the hell.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 13:05
|
|
|
I don't see a huge difference?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 14:40
|
|
|
What are you, blind?!!!! Can't you see how he hosed it all up??!!! I have no idea either
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 14:54
|
|
|
Yvonmukluk has a weird thing for anybody Tom DeFalco or Ron Frenz doing things with Spider-Girl and is really mad about Spider-Verse using the character.fozzy fosbourne posted:It seems like it borrows some visual cues from recent superhero animated series. Like, I can totally imagine a matching set of costumes with a similar style on a Young Avengers Academy show or something. Maybe Hawkguy a little bit, too. Jessica effectively disappeared for decades and then her comeback in New Avengers was done by Frank Cho which kind of set the precedent, like when "she got her powers back" it was done with a joke of getting implants by Cho. Even when Maleev drew her she grew multiple cup sizes between being in and out of costume. It also doesn't help that the character is by default sexual when people decide to use her "pheromone" powers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 14:58
|
|
|
Little Mac posted:I don't see a huge difference? Edit: Waterhaul posted:Yvonmukluk has a weird thing for anybody Tom DeFalco or Ron Frenz doing things with Spider-Girl and is really mad about Spider-Verse using the character. The only reason I've been talking about Spider-Girl recently is because Spider-Verse brought her back, and because Slott seems to not have much grasp on the character at all. And I'm only discussing this in particular because fozzy fosbourne's post about Spider-Woman made me actually notice an issue with Spider-Girl in Coipel's art I'd not previously noticed. But since this the costume thread and some people seem confused, I'll stop rambling off-topic and go into specific detail about what I mean (although I really wish I didn't have to). Image 1: Note the chest spider is nice and prominent. Although Spider-Girl has enough of a bust to indicate that yes, she is a girl, it doesn't distort the logo, seems reasonable for someone of her age and athleticism, and avoids being titillating. Image 2: Spider-Girl's chest emblem has now literally been squashed by her cleavage, with where the bottom legs of the spider meeting the body literally being overshadowed by her chest, which seems to also wrap around the spider's torso. It's clearly an instance of the boob sock effect, and is especially notable (since this is an issue most of the other female characters in Spider-Verse have) because this is meant to be the same character, who's largely been consistently drawn like the first image (and not just by Frenz, other artists have worked on Spider-Girl too, in her own title or elsewhere). Am I the only the one who sees this? Anyway, now I've explained my reasoning I'll stop  about Spider-Girl in this thread.Well except to say that THIS Spider-Girl costume is absolutely terrible, which I think we can all agree on: 
Yvonmukluk fucked around with this message at 15:36 on Dec 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 15:00
|
|
|
I see what you are saying, Yvon. And who drew that final piece of poo poo? Is it just fan art?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 15:43
|
|
|
Wendell posted:I see what you are saying, Yvon. As to your question: it's fanart based off the infamous Spider-Girl Halloween costume that caused a minor online kerfuffle, not because of the skirt or being pink (at least, not just because those things) but because it had a picture of the actual costume on it so you could see how far off the mark it was. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 16:11
|
|
|
.... Holy poo poo. That is crazy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 16:12
|
|
|
Horrible, lazy costumes are the best
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 16:21
|
|
|
Babe Magnet posted:Horrible, lazy costumes are the best Speaking of horrible, lazy costumes, here's another one for Spider-Girl! But before you ask, it's not Mayday Parker, this is...actually, it's not really very clear. She showed up in a crowd scene an anti-drug PSA comic alongside the 616 heroes including Spider-Man one time (complete with caption saying who she was) and was never seen again. She was apparently created for licensing purposes.  So '90s.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 16:45
|
|
|
Yvonmukluk posted:Speaking of horrible, lazy costumes, here's another one for Spider-Girl! But before you ask, it's not Mayday Parker, this is...actually, it's not really very clear. She showed up in a crowd scene an anti-drug PSA comic alongside the 616 heroes including Spider-Man one time (complete with caption saying who she was) and was never seen again. She was apparently created for licensing purposes. Wasn't this one used in Millar/Mcniven Old Man Logan?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 16:53
|
|
|
It was specifically an anti-pot PSA. It was pretty surreal seeing all these superheroes yelling about how marijuana is the devil and kills more people than disease and war combined or whatever. It'd be goofy for something from the 80s, but this was the late 90s. Though I guess it would eventually be topped by those commercials that equated smoking weed to causing 9/11. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gw0y-KfGNk
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 19:22
|
|
|
Yvonmukluk posted:Speaking of horrible, lazy costumes, here's another one for Spider-Girl! But before you ask, it's not Mayday Parker, this is...actually, it's not really very clear. She showed up in a crowd scene an anti-drug PSA comic alongside the 616 heroes including Spider-Man one time (complete with caption saying who she was) and was never seen again. She was apparently created for licensing purposes. I kinda dig the 90-ness of this costume. I bet her out-of-costume look would've been like, a sunday dress and doc martens.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 19:27
|
|
|
Yvonmukluk posted:Speaking of horrible, lazy costumes, here's another one for Spider-Girl! But before you ask, it's not Mayday Parker, this is...actually, it's not really very clear. She showed up in a crowd scene an anti-drug PSA comic alongside the 616 heroes including Spider-Man one time (complete with caption saying who she was) and was never seen again. She was apparently created for licensing purposes. She looks kind of like the Spider-Girl they created for the Spider-Man and Friends toys and books for pre-schoolers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 19:38
|
|
|
Yvonmukluk posted:You don't see how in the second image, the chest spider is clearly distorted due to Coipel's cheescake? I see it, it just doesn't make that huge of a difference to me. The boobs are too large and they seem to be unrealistically squishing out the spider logo. I'd say it's a bad choice by an artist who likes boobs, but it doesn't change the entire read of the image to titillating for me. It sort of reminds me of Leinil Yu, whose art I generally like but I also notice that he loves giving every woman a super badonkadonk butt when they're facing away regardless of pose or context. I guess the part that I disagree with is that there's a significant shift into the cheesecake direction based on that image. She's always been weirdly curvy and even in that classic and non-cheesecakey first image and ones like it I think stuff like her calves look overdone in a silly way, moreso than the usual silly curves of Spider-man. You're right, that particular shot is mostly athletic and not titillating, but the character style easily transitions into stuff like this too, from the cover of Spider-Girl 80:  Now that I look, that's actually the image they're using on that Halloween costume package. Waist thinner than her head, ridiculous thigh gap, boobs also starting to push into the spider legs, it seems to be shouting "sexy lady!" in a way Coipel art is not. The Coipel art is disappointing to me because it seems to be perfectly competent and naturalistic art that's marred by some awkward anatomy and, of course, being comic art the anatomy in question is lady parts. The squished logo seems to be the biggest culprit, just fixing that would remove the illusion that the fabric is folded under her boobs and make her chest seem a little smaller. Don't get me wrong, Coipel's decision to do that is still weird and gross. But if they were photographs, I would say the cover is obviously supposed to be a sexy pose whereas the other is just a normal picture of a girl who happens to have a large chest. I realize that's a bullshit argument because they're both deliberate drawings of women made by men, but my point is that I really don't think that either version has the moral high ground in the cheesecake arena. I could easily understand arguments for finding either one better or worse than the other. I realize I'm not even talking about costumes anymore, sorry.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 19:53
|
|
|
Yvonmukluk posted:Well except to say that THIS Spider-Girl costume is absolutely terrible, which I think we can all agree on:  Also, Mary Marvel.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 00:54
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:It was specifically an anti-pot PSA. It was pretty surreal seeing all these superheroes yelling about how marijuana is the devil and kills more people than disease and war combined or whatever. It'd be goofy for something from the 80s, but this was the late 90s.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 01:01
|
|
|
Say Nothing posted:A miniskirt is not a sensible costume choice for a character who flies or swings around above people's heads. Bicycle shorts and it's fine.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 01:16
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:Bicycle shorts and it's fine. True, which has begged the question "why are they never drawn with bicycle shorts?" for literally decades.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 01:36
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:Bicycle shorts and it's fine. More then fine, the best of both worlds. Shorts to eliminate panty shots and a skirt to hide spandex shorts riding up. mind the walrus posted:True, which has begged the question "why are they never drawn with bicycle shorts?" for literally decades. We all know the answer to that question.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 01:43
|
|
|
Sometimes at cons I see young cosplayers wear skin colored tights so they can be accurate in their costume and not be pedophile bait. Maybe Supergirl should look into that poo poo?
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 01:46
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:Sometimes at cons I see young cosplayers wear skin colored tights so they can be accurate in their costume and not be pedophile bait. Maybe Supergirl should look into that poo poo? That's actually what current Supergirl's costume is said to be but it'll always be drawn as flesh not flesh-tone tights so there's no point to it but as lip service.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 01:50
|
|
|
O.K, but what's the weird crotch-plate all about?
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 03:22
|
|
|
SirDan3k posted:That's actually what current Supergirl's costume is said to be but it'll always be drawn as flesh not flesh-tone tights so there's no point to it but as lip service. Yeah, it doesn't even fit the color scheme if it's 'pants'.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 03:46
|
|
|
Yvonmukluk posted:Am I the only the one who sees this? Anyway, now I've explained my reasoning I'll stop I'll agree that it's exaggerated, but it seems somewhat realistic with what would happen boob-wise given the difference in arm position between the two poses. In the first, because her arms are outstretched and her muscles are tensed, her boobs are somewhat flattened against her chest. But in the second, having her arms closed in towards her body like that results in her boobs being pushed together a bit thus closing up around the center of the costume/logo. Again, I agree with you that it's unnecessarily exaggerated in the second one but it's not particularly inconsistent with real life. At least as far as the boobs I've seen in real life tend to work, anyway. E: Although it would be interesting to have an actual boob-haver weigh in on it (as well as tell me if I'm on the right track or not). the future is WOW fucked around with this message at 04:06 on Dec 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 04:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 19:12 |
|
|
Well, I lack boobs, but it looks like she isn't wearing a bra which seems pretty absurd? To be fair, we should have spider-man's dong freely swinging about, and wolverine's dong-leg cleavage clearly visible through his fozzy fosbourne fucked around with this message at 04:32 on Dec 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 04:17
|
|