where's that new poster of the DC ladies?

[Hypestyle]

in the new comics this week, on the back page, there's an editorial that talks about the creation of it, art by adam hughes..
everybody's in an evening dress--
catwoman, oracle, zatanna, black canary (i guess), power girl, wonder woman, supergirl, donna troy (i guess), Vixen (i guess), poison ivy, and harley quinn...

I want one of these! where are they sold?

[Jack Zodiac]

Nowhere. It's a promo poster.

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b334/longbarreljones/womenoftheDCU.jpg

From left to right:

Catwoman, Oracle, Zatanna, Black Canary, Power Girl, Wonder Woman, Supergirl, Batwoman (sitting down in the chair), Vixen, Poison Ivy, and Harley Quinn.

[Samy]

Kate must be pretty happy to be there...

[Forseti]

Ah... Batwoman. I couldn't decide who to make of that one, but it's so obvious now... She's wearing pants! :rolleyes:

[Samy]

Gotta love the hemline on Supergirl. If I had any doubts that they're intentionally sluttifying her up, they're all gone now. See how EVERYONE else has a decent hemline?

[Will.S]

Gotta love the hemline on Supergirl. If I had any doubts that they're intentionally sluttifying her up, they're all gone now. See how EVERYONE else has a decent hemline?
Heh I noticed that as well, on the plus side at least Hughes gave her an accurate body type for her age.

[Samy]

It's a miracle her "gown" doesn't have bare midriff.

[Agent_Torpor]

Gotta love the hemline on Supergirl. If I had any doubts that they're intentionally sluttifying her up, they're all gone now. See how EVERYONE else has a decent hemline?

Well, Kate Kane's in a sensible sansabelt dyke pantsuit. Zzzz.

And PG should be showing some damn leg. This aint your wedding, hon.

[HouseSolo]

This has been out for a while hasn't it? I'm surprised no one's tried to make it into a wallpaper yet.

[rwe1138]

Ah... Batwoman. I couldn't decide who to make of that one, but it's so obvious now... She's wearing pants! :rolleyes:

I thought she was Lois when I first saw it.

[CBikle]

Hey Catwoman's there ! (Didio originally didn't want her in the poster).

[Agent_Torpor]

Hey Catwoman's there ! (Didio originally didn't want her in the poster).

Did you read the DC Nation spot? She's only there because Hughes slipped her in anyway.

And in the DC Nation slot, the image they printed makes Poison Ivy look like she's got green skin. Weird!

[Libaax]

Has Batwoman her own series.....

The pants thing with her is way too lame.


Kate Spencer is the best new heroine and she isnt not up there how......


Poison Ivy ? Why? She appears once a year.....

[COMIC GEEK]

no starfire :mad:

[Agent_Torpor]

no starfire :mad:

That's the biggest omission, IMO.

No Starfire? Come on.

Can someone fill me in on the fourth blonde? I know PG, Supergirl, and Canary... Yeah, and I don't know who the black chick is, so sue me.

[Forseti]

Can someone fill me in on the fourth blonde? I know PG, Supergirl, and Canary... Yeah, and I don't know who the black chick is, so sue me.
Jack already posted it. :redface:

From left to right:

Catwoman, Oracle, Zatanna, Black Canary, Power Girl, Wonder Woman, Supergirl, Batwoman (sitting down in the chair), Vixen, Poison Ivy, and Harley Quinn.
I love this rendition of Harley, by the way. Her dress has tassels. <3

[Agent_Torpor]

Jack already posted it. :redface:


I love this rendition of Harley, by the way. Her dress has tassels. <3

Eh, now I get it!

[Libaax]

That's the biggest omission, IMO.

No Starfire? Come on.

Can someone fill me in on the fourth blonde? I know PG, Supergirl, and Canary... Yeah, and I don't know who the black chick is, so sue me.

Vixen was in JLA its hard to miss her plus the first post wrote her name ;)

[carabas]

Has Batwoman her own series...Yes and no. Greg Rucka and J.H. Williams III have alledgly completed two complete issues of her ongoing series, but DC seems reluctant for some reason to publish them.

[Libaax]

I dont really care about her. A comic with this version of Batwoman would deleted forever if it was up to me....


I just said that cause Kate Spencer is her own star of acclaimed series but someone else is up there just cause she is a les.....

[Forseti]

I have to agree there. It's a promotional poster, so... promote?

A not-so widely recognized face (and body :redface: ) among those ladies is bound to stir up conversation and curiosity.

And yes, I'm posting this because I want Manhunter to stick around!

[carabas]

I dont really care about her. A comic with this version of Batwoman would deleted forever if it was up to me...Truth is, we don't really enough about her to like or dislike her (unles you have some sort pathological dislike of gay characters, that is). It's high time DC gave the character a fair chance.
And no, dropping her in the lap of the 52 writers who didn't have a clue who this new characyer was either, does not constitute a chance.


I just said that cause Kate Spencer is her own star of acclaimed series but someone else is up there just cause she is a les...Sense this sentence does not make. Sorry, I really can't make out what you're going for there.

[DonC]

And in the DC Nation slot, the image they printed makes Poison Ivy look like she's got green skin. Weird!


She's supposed to have green skin now. By what I'm sure is a strange coincidence (:rolleyes: ) DCU Poison Ivy changed from a lady with plant powers into an actual plant right around the time the Timm-verse Poison Ivy changed from a lady with plant powers to an actual plant.

[Pól Rua]

I thought she was Lois when I first saw it.

I thought it was Donna Troy.

[Libaax]

Truth is, we don't really enough about her to like or dislike her (unles you have some sort pathological dislike of gay characters, that is). It's high time DC gave the character a fair chance.
And no, dropping her in the lap of the 52 writers who didn't have a clue who this new characyer was either, does not constitute a chance.

Sense this sentence does not make. Sorry, I really can't make out what you're going for there.

I dont dislike her because she is gay. I just dont like how they used her in 52 like a gimmick. The name Bat deserves better than a gimmick IMO. This promo is another proof.

I would love a Batwoman if she were done right. Just like how i like anything that is Batman family comic.

[Ghost Shark]

It's a beautiful piece of art, that's all that really matters.

[Pól Rua]

I dont dislike her because she is gay. I just dont like how they used her in 52 like a gimmick. The name Bat deserves better than a gimmick IMO. This promo is another proof.

I would love a Batwoman if she were done right. Just like how i like anything that is Batman family comic.

Me too. I dislike the character because she is utterly superfluous.
Seriously, what the hell does a Batwoman series offer that cant' be had by reading Batman?

[Pól Rua]

It's a beautiful piece of art, that's all that really matters.

It IS that. Adam Hughes is a phenomenal artist.

[carabas]

I dont dislike her because she is gay. I just dont like how they used her in 52 like a gimmick. The name Bat deserves better than a gimmick IMO. This promo is another proof.

I would love a Batwoman if she were done right. Just like how i like anything that is Batman family comic.
I really don't see how she is a gimmick.
It does boggle the mind the way DC has been handling the character though.
She wasn't supposed to be in 52 at all; she originally was just going to be a new ongoing series by Devin Grayson (two issues completed, art and all, but never published).
DC then changed their minds and pushed for her to be put in 52, where the writers didn't really know anything more about the character than we do.
And finally they gave her a new ongoing by Greg Rucka and J.H. Williams III, two issues completed, art and all, but which still kept under wraps for whatever reason.

And finally she's been put out of nowhere in James Robinson's new Justice League book (because he really wanted a Bat-character in it), but I strongly suspect that by the time the first issue comes out she'll be replaced by Catwoman or Azrael or whomever.

Someone at DC or WB apparently does not like Bat-Woman at all.

Me too. I dislike the character because she is utterly superfluous.
Seriously, what the hell does a Batwoman series offer that cant' be had by reading Batman?This is very true for a great many fan-favourite Bat-satelite charcters.

[Pól Rua]

This is very true for a great many fan-favourite Bat-satelite charcters.

Sure. Like Kathy Kane the original Batwoman. A character ironically designed by DC in the 50's to act as a 'beard' so that people wouldn't think Batman and Robin were gay lovers, and since relegated to obscurity.
And rightly so.

[Hypestyle]

promo poster only? that sucks.. what's wrong with DC marketing?

[Forseti]

At least it's a nice promo poster. None of that 'Superman crying, oh no whose feet are touching the ground?!?' nonsense.

[siberia77]

power girl is just outrageously hot :eek:

[rwe1138]

I thought it was Donna Troy.

She was my second thought.

[titanfan]

Bah, I thought Supergirl was Wonder Girl. Hard to recognize Supergirl when she's not showing her belly button.

[Xero]

You know who would make a good team?

Batwoman and Flamebird, the other Dynamic Duo.

[Sniper23]

Huntress should bein there ahead of Batwoman.

[Gothos]

Sure. Like Kathy Kane the original Batwoman. A character ironically designed by DC in the 50's to act as a 'beard' so that people wouldn't think Batman and Robin were gay lovers, and since relegated to obscurity.
And rightly so.


While I agree that Batwoman was CONCEIVED as a beard, I think that on occasion her stories did take on a few extra dimensions, though nothing spectacular.

I guess the question on whether a Batwoman adventure is distinct from a Batman adventure depends on whether or not you think women bring something distinctly different to the superheroic genre than men do.

[Christopher O]

I find the claim that Batwoman is a gimmick to be a bit ridiculous. Sure, there was a bit of a media frenzy about her being a lesbian, but there hasn't been anything gimmick-y about her appearances. They didn't launch a series off the so-called gimmick. They didn't create a storyline in an existing title that built off the so-called gimmick. In fact, they've been very careful about avoiding the gimmick. Unfortunately, they've been too careful, and any excitement and energy surrounding the character has dissipated.

Anyway, it's a nice drawing, but I definitely think Batwoman's pose and outfit are off. From what we've seen, she's a bit more lipstick than that. I'd buy that pose and less than formal look in a formal setting from Renee but not so much from glitzy socialite Kate Kane. It very much screams of Hughes trying to convey that she's a lesbian which just makes it seem stereotypical. It's a bit unfortunate. Everyone else looks great, though. Catwoman is fierce.

[G. Wayne]

It's Batwoman?! Huh, we figured it was Donna Troy too, though Lois Lane makes sense as well.

Gotta love the hemline on Supergirl. If I had any doubts that they're intentionally sluttifying her up, they're all gone now. See how EVERYONE else has a decent hemline?

I'd classify the hemline as more of a clue as to who it is, since the hemline pretty much matches the length of her skirt on her costume. 'Sides, Black Canary's split goes up higher.

[Forseti]

I find the claim that Batwoman is a gimmick to be a bit ridiculous. Sure, there was a bit of a media frenzy about her being a lesbian, but there hasn't been anything gimmick-y about her appearances. They didn't launch a series off the so-called gimmick. They didn't create a storyline in an existing title that built off the so-called gimmick. In fact, they've been very careful about avoiding the gimmick. Unfortunately, they've been too careful, and any excitement and energy surrounding the character has dissipated.
She has been around so little since her big mainstream media reveal 2 years ago that it's very easy to see her as a gimmick with no other purpose than to attract said mainstream media attention at that particular time.

[Christopher O]

She has been around so little since her big mainstream media reveal 2 years ago that it's very easy to see her as a gimmick with no other purpose than to attract said mainstream media attention at that particular time.
DC didn't capitalize on the media attention. If it were a gimmick, they would have. In fact, they should have. Also, Didio has mentioned that they have put effort into diversifying their superheroes. If Batwoman was a gimmick, so were the new Blue Beetle and the new Atom.

[carabas]

DC didn't capitalize on the media attention. If it were a gimmick, they would have. In fact, they should have. Also, Didio has mentioned that they have put effort into diversifying their superheroes. If Batwoman was a gimmick, so were the new Blue Beetle and the new Atom.Quite the opposite even. DC saw the media attention for the gay Bat-character and promptly canceled the planned ongoing series for the character.

[Forseti]

DC didn't capitalize on the media attention. If it were a gimmick, they would have. In fact, they should have. Also, Didio has mentioned that they have put effort into diversifying their superheroes. If Batwoman was a gimmick, so were the new Blue Beetle and the new Atom.
I'm not talking about her as a gimmick character, but as a marketing gimmick, a headline saying: "Ooh, we gots ourselves a lesbian batwoman! Aren't we all mature and significant all of a sudden. Grab some batman comics now, boys. Quick!"

At this point, one might hardly even consider her a meaningful character anymore. Her little handful of appearances didn't define her as much of anything, surely not a hero.

[carabas]

I'm not talking about her as a gimmick character, but as a marketing gimmick, a headline saying: "Ooh, we gots ourselves a lesbian batwoman! Aren't we all mature and significant all of a sudden. Grab some batman comics now, boys. Quick!"How is it a marketing gimmick if the character isn't marketed, or even used?

At this point, one might hardly even consider her a meaningful character anymore. Her little handful of appearances didn't define her as much of anything, surely not a hero.I don't know. Willingly sacrificing ones own life to save lives tends to be heroic and stuff.

[Michael Painter]

Yeah, I'd say that Starfire was an omission, but I think not as much as Manhunter, who is one of the few DC females who has their own actual ongoing series being published at the moment. (Power Girl has yet to be solicited, and I will mention Supergirl and Wonder Woman. Oracle and Black Canary shouldn't count as much as they are still part of ensemble books).

[Forseti]

How is it a marketing gimmick if the character isn't marketed, or even used?
Cars don't come with bikini models, rap albums don't come with scantily-clad 'b*tches'. And Bat-family comics don't seem to come with Batwoman. Let go of her as a character to follow my train of thought. Think of her as a bikini model smiling on the hood of a new sportscar. The character isn't the gimmick, sending the idea of the character into the world, without much of a follow-up, is.

I don't know. Willingly sacrificing ones own life to save lives tends to be heroic and stuff.
Rucka tried, I'll give him that.

[Christopher O]

Cars don't come with bikini models, rap albums don't come with scantily-clad 'b*tches'. And Bat-family comics don't seem to come with Batwoman. Let go of her as a character to follow my train of thought. Think of her as a bikini model smiling on the hood of a new sportscar. The character isn't the gimmick, sending the idea of the character into the world, without much of a follow-up, is.
To what end? As carabas mentioned, the media attention seemed to intimidate or at least overwhelm DC to the point that they shelved her ongoing. No, I still think the gimmick accusation is flimsy, especially since they haven't capitalized on it at all.

[Forseti]

To what end?
To get word of their product out in the mainstream press. The DC press release mentioned her as about to appear in 52. What was so special about her that she needed to be in a press release weeks before she materialized in print, except for gimmick value? Heck, I still don't know what so special about her, except her being a 'lipstick lesbian' shoehorned into Montoya's backstory.

As carabas mentioned, the media attention seemed to intimidate or at least overwhelm DC to the point that they shelved her ongoing. No, I still think the gimmick accusation is flimsy, especially since they haven't capitalized on it at all.
Failure to capitalize doesn't mean it wasn't a gimmick. That just means it was a badly handled gimmick.

[carabas]

To get word of their product out in the mainstream press. The DC press release mentioned her as about to appear in 52. What was so special about her that she needed to be in a press release weeks before she materialized in print, except for gimmick value? Heck, I still don't know what so special about her, except her being a 'lipstick lesbian' shoehorned into Montoya's backstory.The New York Times article was not just about Batwoman, but about the various diversive DC chartacters (and a few Marvel ones) that were coming out at that time, like the then new Blue Beetle, the Great Ten, the new Atom...
Of course, the mainstream press being the mainstream press, it kinda turned into
"LESBIAN BAT-WOMAN (and some Mexican kid and so...)"
Failure to capitalize doesn't mean it wasn't a gimmick. That just means it was a badly handled gimmick.
So why did they cancel the series?
http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=10831

[Forseti]

The New York Times article was not just about Batwoman, but about the various diversive DC chartacters (and a few Marvel ones) that were coming out at that time, like the then new Blue Beetle, the Great Ten, the new Atom...
Of course, the mainstream press being the mainstream press, it kinda turned into
"LESBIAN BAT-WOMAN (and some Mexican kid and so...)"
Well, you know, if you pitch a character into the big bad mainstream world who's just like Batman in all respects that most people remember (being a wealthy Gotham socialite with a crime-fighting, bat-themed alter ego) except for her being a drop-dead gorgeous lesbian in high heels, what else are the mainstream press going to pick up on? Let's not be naive here, no one is going to see anything else there than just another Batman with a new gimmick on top.

So why did they cancel the series?
http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=10831
DC didn't think their press release through very well and pitched her as what could only be perceived as a gimmick?

[carabas]

DC didn't think their press release through very well and pitched her as what could only be perceived as a gimmick?
Are you backpedalling and admitting that first impressions aside, the character may be not just a gimmick after all?
What's so bad about gimmicks anyway? Batman and Superman got big on gimmicks. They were gimmicks back in the day.

[Forseti]

Are you backpedalling and admitting that first impressions aside, the character may be not just a gimmick after all?
I'm not backpedaling at all, if you read back to my first post on the 'gimmick' issue, the only thing I've argued is that "it's very easy to see her as a gimmick". The only thing I've been arguing is appearances. Someone posted that claims of Batwoman being a gimmick were a bit ridiculous. That's what I'm disagreeing with; I can easily see how people would consider her to be a gimmick. There's nothing ridiculous about that perception at all.
What's so bad about gimmicks anyway? Batman and Superman got big on gimmicks. They were gimmicks back in the day.
I never said gimmicks were bad; some of my favorite things in all walks of life are riddled with gimmicks. I'm just saying, if something looks like a gimmick, people will see a gimmick.

[Justin1592]

Not to derail the lesbian talk, as I'm a big fan of hot chicks making out, but the poster is indeed gorgeous.

I picked up a few at WW Philly, and since my wife wouldn't let me wallpaper the bedroom with them, I just sold one on ebay (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=200232031409&ru=http://shop.ebay.com:80/items/__200232031409_W0QQ_nkwZ200232031409QQ_npmdnuZQQ_n pmvZ3QQ_fviZ1). I'll be listing another one probably this weekend.

[Sizzle]

That's a nice poster. Not having Starfire is a big omission.

[jade_nova]

I am only the one who notices that without little things to identify each character none of them would be recognizable.

[Forseti]

I am only the one who notices that without little things to identify each character none of them would be recognizable.
Except for Powergirl. No little things to speak of. :redface:

[G. Wayne]

I am only the one who notices that without little things to identify each character none of them would be recognizable.

For the most part, yeah. Kudos to Hughes for making them all at least look different, but it's the nature of the beast with constantly having so many different visual interpretations for the characters. Same thing would apply to the guys out of costume too. The primary recognizable difference in that case would be what, hair color?

[Pól Rua]

DC didn't capitalize on the media attention. If it were a gimmick, they would have. In fact, they should have. Also, Didio has mentioned that they have put effort into diversifying their superheroes. If Batwoman was a gimmick, so were the new Blue Beetle and the new Atom.

Except that Blue Beetle and Atom have had a bunch of comics where they've appeared and been the focus of interesting stories.

Batwoman appears to have been the focus of:
(a) a bunch of mainstream newsarticles consisting mainly of the media's love of the term 'lipstick lesbian'.
(b) a couple of unmemorable appearances in which she reaffirms her lesbianness by chatting with renowned comic book lesbian Renee Montoya and having sparks over their previous lesbian relationship.
(c) Lesbian.

This is not a complaint about Batwoman being a lesbian. It's a complaint about the fact that, unlike Blue Beetle, Atom or Firestorm, she's not a legacy hero, she's a carbon copy.

A legacy hero REPLACES the existing character.
A carbon copy hero exists superfluously ALONGSIDE the existing character.

So yeah, she's not Blue Beetle, or Atom, or Firestorm (or Barry Allen, Hal Jordon and Ray Palmer, for that matter).
She's USAgent, Thunderstrike, or Scarlet Spider.
I think carbon copy characters dilute the original, while adding very little.

And I do find the whole lesbian thing annoying, not because I'm homophobic, but because it seems that that's all there IS to the character. The fact that she exists almost purely as 'The Lesbian Batman' is annoying and the very definition of tokenism.
Rest assured, I'd find it equally annoying if DC introduced a new, Hispanic Blue Beetle, didn't give him his own series, but had him make infrequent appearances where he did nothing but sell fruit, chant Speedy Gonzales catchphrases and celebrate Dia De Los Muertos.

[Pól Rua]

I am only the one who notices that without little things to identify each character none of them would be recognizable.

Little things like facial structure, facial expression, hair cuts, choice of clothing styles, body language, and body shape? Yeah.
By that definition, in any picture of me and my pals, we're hard to distinguish except for 'little things'.

I spotted Catwoman by hair colour, hairstyle, the cat, the black dress and glasses.
Oracle by the chair, the haircut, the generally more slender frame, the glasses and the bemused look.
Zatanna I spotted using the hat, the hair and the generally theatrical pose.
Canary was the hair and the choker, as well as the fact that she's interacting with Oracle.
Power Girl has a distinctive body shape (not just the breasts, but also broader shoulders and more muscular arms (compare with Oracle's or Canary's), she's also recognizable by the very distinctive hair cut and the chest window on the dress like the one on her costume.
Diana's outfit is obviously classically influenced, plus, she's the tallest one there, the hair is also classical looking, she's wearing her bracelets and tiara, her arms are quite muscular, she has a forthright, bold pose which emphasizes her general demeanor.
Supergirl looks like the youngest one there. Her face emphasizes her youth, plus her generally shy but impish demeanor. The wrap is reminiscent of her cape and the dress is likewise similar to her costume.
Vixen is obviously black, plus she has a distinctive haircut and is definitely striking a fashion model pose. The earrings and necklace also have a 'haute couture' look. Plus, she has a more slender, less buxom look which reflects current trends in modelling.
Ivy's face is haughty and also a little crazy looking (the 'lighting'). She has ivy in her hair which is a distinctive auburn, and the lining on her dress and wrist resemble plants.
Harley I usually don't recognize because of the lack of make-up, but by placing her next to ivy and giving her the Joker wand, it draws attention back to her distinctive haircut (which we rarely get to see (short enough to fit under her cap/cowl, but long enough to remain feminine). Her facial expression also says 'Harley'.

So it's not like it's a picture of 11 identical women with slightly different hairstyles.
The fact that Hughes incorporated all these 'character' elements speaks to his talents as an artist, while I feel that most comic artists would have been satisfied with 'eleven hot chicks', he goes out of his way to make each one distinctive and reflect their character, background and personality.

[Pól Rua]

For the most part, yeah. Kudos to Hughes for making them all at least look different, but it's the nature of the beast with constantly having so many different visual interpretations for the characters. Same thing would apply to the guys out of costume too. The primary recognizable difference in that case would be what, hair color?

Clark Kent tends to wear business suits. He has been known to favour blue as a colour, plus he brushes his hair back and wears glasses. He tends to be broad chested and shouldered and have a fairly prominent jawline.
Clark's personality usually leads to him having an open, guileless expression. He's often happy, or at least content. He tends to slouch a bit and affect a casual demeanor to make him look a little different to Superman.

Bruce Wayne is probably going to wear formalwear. If not that, then expensive, designer clothing. His facial expression is either going to be sly and slightly sardonic, or light-hearted and airy, depending on how much he feels like pushing the billionnaire wastrel thing. His build tends to be more athletic and less 'cornfed' than Clark.

Hal Jordon is cocky and confident. He's usually pretty happy. He'll probably be wearing a leather flight jacket or old-fashioned bomber jacket. Possibly even sunglasses. He'll probably be wearing a casual shirt and cargo pants. His whole stance and body language will say 'overwhelming confidence'.

[carabas]

A legacy hero REPLACES the existing character.
A carbon copy hero exists superfluously ALONGSIDE the existing character.We've had multiple Flashes and Green Lanterns at the same time. We now have two Atoms active at the same time.


Plus her ongoing was supposed to come out in a year without an active Batman.
And I do find the whole lesbian thing annoying, not because I'm homophobic, but because it seems that that's all there IS to the character. The fact that she exists almost purely as 'The Lesbian Batman' is annoying and the very definition of tokenism.
You'd be right, except that between Maggie Sawyer, Renee Montaya, Hollie, IIvy and Harley (supposedly), Io, and probably a couple more, lesbians are a dime a dozen at DC. And she has gotten two ongoing series now, both kiboshed with multiple issues completed but unpublished. There is definitely some odd editorial tomfoolery going on there.

[Pól Rua]

We've had multiple Flashes and Green Lanterns at the same time. We now have two Atoms active at the same time.
Yes, but at the time of their creation, that wasn't the case.
When Barry Allen debuted as The Flash, there was no idea that they were actually going to return Jay Garrick to the continuity.
Also, Barry had enough adventures to develop himself as a character before they brought Jay back.

As another example, let's take a look at She-Hulk. When she first appeared, she really was in the same boat as Batwoman. Hulk, but a woman. Her first series pretty much flopped for that purpose. She brought nothing new to the character, and was pretty much entirely superfluous.
Finally, after her third series, they finally figured out what ab out her was different to The Hulk, playing up the lawyer thing and the comedy aspect of the character.
Since Peter David's taken over, it's gone back to Hulk, but a girl.
Nightwing has the same problem.
You need to present the new character in such a way that readers are getting stories SUBSTANTIALLY different to that offered by the Original to their Carbon Copy. If you can get costumed urban crimefighting from Batman, why would you want the same from Batman lite?
John Stewart was the same. It's taken Bruce Timm and Paul Dini to actually build John as a character to the point where he's not just 'Hal Jordon, but black'.

Batwoman as a character needs to demonstrate how she offers something I can't get from just reading Batman. And so far, the answer from DC appears to be "she kisses girls... AND IS ONE!!!"
This is the definition of tokenism.

You'd be right, except that between Maggie Sawyer, Renee Montaya, Hollie, Ivy and Harley (supposedly), Io, and probably a couple more, lesbians are a dime a dozen at DC. And she has gotten two ongoing series now, both kiboshed with multiple issues completed but unpublished. There is definitely some odd editorial tomfoolery going on there.
Of course.
That said, no stories = superfluous character.
The previous character have all had a chance to show us what they offer besides their sexual preference in terms of storytelling. Batwoman has not, and to be honest, I'm not altogether sure DC has any idea.

Also, I wouldn't say that lesbians are a dime a dozen at DC until there are maybe a dozen of them.
So far, we have three supporting characters, and two villains in the 'maybe' column (both are almost certainly bisexual, rather than lesbian, and given Harley's bizarre sexual dysfunctions - masochism, obsession with violent psychopaths - she's really not the best role-model out there). Of course, there used to be Ayla (Lightning Lass) Ranzz and Salu (Shrinking Violet) Digby in the Legion, but both of them hard their homosexuality retconned away.

[G. Wayne]

Clark Kent tends to wear business suits. He has been known to favour blue as a colour, plus he brushes his hair back and wears glasses. He tends to be broad chested and shouldered and have a fairly prominent jawline.
Clark's personality usually leads to him having an open, guileless expression. He's often happy, or at least content. He tends to slouch a bit and affect a casual demeanor to make him look a little different to Superman.

Bruce Wayne is probably going to wear formalwear. If not that, then expensive, designer clothing. His facial expression is either going to be sly and slightly sardonic, or light-hearted and airy, depending on how much he feels like pushing the billionnaire wastrel thing. His build tends to be more athletic and less 'cornfed' than Clark.

Hal Jordon is cocky and confident. He's usually pretty happy. He'll probably be wearing a leather flight jacket or old-fashioned bomber jacket. Possibly even sunglasses. He'll probably be wearing a casual shirt and cargo pants. His whole stance and body language will say 'overwhelming confidence'.

Some of the males do tend towards distinctive clothing out of costume, wasn't arguing that. Clark in blue suits or Metropolis sports team gear. Bruce in the black formalwear. Hal in that brown flight jacket. What I was getting at, which I thought jade_nova was alluding to with the women, was that if you put all the men in something like a tux and line them up, you'd get the same thing where you still need a good artist who can supply other clues to who is who.

[jade_nova]

What I was getting at, which I thought jade_nova was alluding to with the women, was that if you put all the men in something like a tux and line them up, you'd get the same thing where you still need a good artist who can supply other clues to who is who.

That is what I am getting at. When I first saw the poster I was wondering who the characters are until the little clues started popping up.

[Binker]

You know that "Real Power of the DC Universe" image by Adam Hughes? Well, that image appeared recently in the actual comics from DC recently. Manhunter #32 is the only one I know about, but it goes from Catwoman and cuts off after Supergirl. What other comics did it appear in, and is there one with the other side (side B, is what you would probably call it) with Talia, Vixen, Ivy and Harley (I would assume it would include soem of the "side A" women too)?

Thanks

[Slade Wilson]

I saw it Manhunter too. I didn't see "side B" in any of my comics this week. Maybe it will come out next week?

Awesome spread by the way. They gotta make that into a poster.

[Fatguy]

Notice how they cut out both the black woman and the lesbian??

/conspiracy

[Slade Wilson]

True.

They needed to add Amanda Waller in a tight sexy dress.

[DonC]

I saw it Manhunter too. I didn't see "side B" in any of my comics this week. Maybe it will come out next week?

Awesome spread by the way. They gotta make that into a poster.



It is a poster. It's a con giveaway.

[Slade Wilson]

It is a poster. It's a con giveaway.
Awesome. :smile: