Worst Wonder Woman Covers [Archive] - Comic Book Resources Forums

AndyMangels

09-09-2009, 02:16 AM

I absolutely abhorred the Bolland cover above, and it definitely ranks as one of the worst covers.

I love horror movies, but this is the equivalent of the "Hostel version of WW" in my eyes. It's not WW who is strong and capable, staring down the barrel of the gun, daring the guy to try and shoot her before she ducks out of the way.

This is WW as a victim, defeated, demoralized, about to die, and grimacing as her life is about to be ended by a man. The only thing more horrifying would have been if Bolland had added tears streaming down her face and a snot bubble.

Seriously, put your mother or your sister in that image, and then tell me you'd think it "looks good."

Kevenn

09-09-2009, 06:40 AM

I've always particularly despised these two covers - combined with a pretty rotten story, they're, at best, forgotten issues.
http://www.wonderwoman-online.com/albums/comic/v2/photo159.jpg
http://www.wonderwoman-online.com/albums/comic/v2/photo160.jpg
:eek:

MWGallaher

09-09-2009, 07:04 AM

Since you brought up the subject, I've noticed instead that Wonder Woman has been blessed with fewer bad covers than any other long-running comic book that I can think of. Even in the pits of the 90's, when every other superhero comic was getting grossly distorted Image-influenced disasters, DC was putting Brian Bolland on WW's covers, then artists like Adam Hughes...wow...looking at the complete cover galleries, it's hard to spot many real clunkers in the modern era--unless you have problems with the content, as Andy does above, it's hard to argue with the execution.
The Bronze Age covers can be pretty conventional, but they were almost always highly dynamic and technically competent. The Silver Age covers were pretty wacky, but, again, well-executed and definitely serving sales well. And the Golden Age covers? Those H. G. Peter covers were sui generis--I wouldn't trade any of his covers for more conventional works.
The only stretches of WW cover runs that leave me cold are the Irwin Hasen covers after Peter died, and even those aren't particularly bad, just mundane.
Nope, bad WW covers are the rare exception.

Black Atom

09-09-2009, 01:41 PM

Calvin Government

09-09-2009, 02:13 PM

I sorta think that's why this is a great cover. There's no drama in an image of WW tied up with a gun to her head with a "make my day" grin on her face.

There's no drama in this cover, either - after all, you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that she would survive the issue. Thus, rather than making a cover show an interesting character moment or trait, or at least one that suggests that she's a heroine for a reason, it went for shock value. Even if you know she'll survive, it's an image of the strongest superheroine, reduced to near tears at some guy holding a gun to her head.

That isn't drama; it's shocking.

Free-Man

09-09-2009, 02:44 PM

There's no drama in this cover, either - after all, you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that she would survive the issue. Thus, rather than making a cover show an interesting character moment or trait, or at least one that suggests that she's a heroine for a reason, it went for shock value. Even if you know she'll survive, it's an image of the strongest superheroine, reduced to near tears at some guy holding a gun to her head.

That isn't drama; it's shocking.

I didn't think people hated that cover all that much. I always thought the actual full page shot of her chained up and agged in that storyline was more controversial.

Black Atom

09-09-2009, 03:12 PM

There's no drama in this cover, either - after all, you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that she would survive the issue. Thus, rather than making a cover show an interesting character moment or trait, or at least one that suggests that she's a heroine for a reason, it went for shock value. Even if you know she'll survive, it's an image of the strongest superheroine, reduced to near tears at some guy holding a gun to her head.

That isn't drama; it's shocking.

You say that like it's a negative. Covers are supposed to be shocking and dramatic. Whether the character dies in the story doesn't really matter. The image, outside of the context of knowing what happens in the story, is very dramatic.

And vulnerability IS an interesting character trait. I know Wonder Woman is a strong, capable hero--I don't need it reinforced 100 times over on
every cover (or story, for that matter).

AndyMangels

09-09-2009, 04:35 PM

You say that like it's a negative. Covers are supposed to be shocking and dramatic. Whether the character dies in the story doesn't really matter. The image, outside of the context of knowing what happens in the story, is very dramatic.
And vulnerability IS an interesting character trait. I know Wonder Woman is a strong, capable hero--I don't need it reinforced 100 times over on
every cover (or story, for that matter).

Apply that same logic in the example I gave above.

Put your mother or your sister or best female friend in that exact same image (somebody who you know is alive), and then tell me you'd think it "looks good."

Whether you know they're alive, whether you know they'll survive, whether you know "it's just a story," it's pure shock. It's the equivalent of a "woman in refrigerator" moment. It's the Lady Bathory sequence in Hostel II. This cover exists to sell the book solely based on "look how much we debased and degraded Wonder Woman!"

Calvin Government

09-09-2009, 05:40 PM

You say that like it's a negative. Covers are supposed to be shocking and dramatic. Whether the character dies in the story doesn't really matter. The image, outside of the context of knowing what happens in the story, is very dramatic.

And vulnerability IS an interesting character trait. I know Wonder Woman is a strong, capable hero--I don't need it reinforced 100 times over on
every cover (or story, for that matter).

I guess we just disagree on what drama is. I would find an image of Wonder Woman chained up and staring down the gunman confidently far more dramatic. What does she know that he doesn't? How is she going to get out of this? These are questions that I can't answer. Will she survive, though? That's a question I can answer... and my next question, knowing that they feel the main draw of the issue is "WILL WONDER WOMAN SURVIVE?", would have to be, "Yes. Why should I care?"

I see this, and I just roll my eyes. It's shocking, yes - Wonder Woman reduced to near tears would be. But dramatic? Where, precisely, is the drama in that cover?

Also, note, I am not against the cover because it is degrading to Wonder Woman. I am against it because it is dull, and purposely sacrificed artistry for shock.

Franklin

09-09-2009, 05:55 PM

Black Atom

09-09-2009, 05:56 PM

Apply that same logic in the example I gave above.

Put your mother or your sister or best female friend in that exact same image (somebody who you know is alive), and then tell me you'd think it "looks good."

Wonder Woman is a fictonal character, albeit one I like a whole lot. But that doesn't compare to the feelings I have for my mother or sister. It seems absurd to compare the two.

Whether you know they're alive, whether you know they'll survive, whether you know "it's just a story," it's pure shock. It's the equivalent of a "woman in refrigerator" moment. It's the Lady Bathory sequence in Hostel II. This cover exists to sell the book solely based on "look how much we debased and degraded Wonder Woman!"

That's a pretty cynical opinion of Brian Bolland's work, if I say so. I think he tries to capture the humanity of the characters in the covers he does. That's true for a lot of his WW and Animal Man stuff. He could just throw characters into a generic, iconic poses issue after issue, but it seems he really tries to capture the drama and danger of the threat that hero will face in that issue. And I prefer to see that, really.

CBikle

09-09-2009, 06:23 PM

Seriously, put your mother or your sister in that image, and then tell me you'd think it "looks good."

There are very few comic book covers that I'd want to see any of my family on.

I think you're just being too sensitive.

Kurt Busiek

09-09-2009, 06:44 PM

Apply that same logic in the example I gave above.

Put your mother or your sister or best female friend in that exact same image (somebody who you know is alive), and then tell me you'd think it "looks good."

While I can understand the other criticisms of the cover, this one doesn't make much sense. We don't judge covers on whether we'd like them if the people being menaced on them were our mothers.

I mean, by that standard, the poster to JAWS is a bad poster, because if you imagine your mother about to be eaten by a shark, you wouldn't much care for it. Or that cool cover where Magneto's shadow is looming over the scattered unconscious bodies of the X-Men -- is that a bad cover because if you imagine your family being menaced by Magneto and all unconscious and helpless, you wouldn't think it cheery? The cover to CRISIS where Superman is holding the dead Supergirl -- put a family member in either role, either dead or overcome with grief, and that's not so good. How about the "Flash of Two Worlds" cover, where two Flashes are racing to try to save a construction worker from being ganked by an I-beam -- what if that's your dad?

How about those old MYSTERY IN SPACE and STRANGE ADVENTURES covers where humans are trapped in birdcages -- that's not something you want to see happen to family members! Or the WEIRD WONDER TALES cover where angry gorillas are about to perform surgery on Arthur Nagan -- what if that was your brother?

Like I said, I can understand the other criticisms -- but even if Diana was looking defiant and heroic, that's still not a situation you'd want to see your sister in. But we don't really judge action/adventure art by whether we'd feel good seeing family members in peril instead of the heroic characters.

Hey, the GOONIES poster! Would you want to see your family members hanging from a stalactite? Probably not, but is that really a measure of whether it's a good poster?

kdb

froinlaven

09-09-2009, 07:00 PM

I have a soft spot for WW #83; it was the first comic I had a letter (and it was my first letter to a comic) printed in.

I do recall the hostile reception this other Bolland (and yes, I love Bolland's WW - it kills me that that graphic novel from so long ago didn't pan out) cover got, though:

http://www.coverbrowser.com/image/wonder-woman-1987/67-1.jpg

I actually have this issue, which is all in all pretty good, but I can see how the cover images invoke strong negative feelings in someone. It displays Diana in a defeated manner, (It's hard to see anyone's favorite superhero/superheroine in a submissive and defeated manner). Seeing Wonder Woman beaten up, sprawled out on the ground wearing a potato sack with a food dish in front of her is rather disgusting and demeaning to the character (which is the point, I guess).

Ultimately, its the artist/writer and publisher who decide what is appropriate to sell to the public. This cover, I believe was a display of poor taste.

Shellhead

09-09-2009, 07:04 PM

I'm starting to suspect there are at least two very different groups of Wonder Woman fans.

froinlaven

09-09-2009, 07:12 PM

I'm starting to suspect there are at least two very different groups of Wonder Woman fans.

There might be more!

I've been "collecting" Wonder Woman a long time and every different writer has legions of loyal fans and on the other side, legions of people who hate how they write Wonder Woman.

That's just the way it's always been.

Black Atom

09-09-2009, 08:24 PM

I guess we just disagree on what drama is. I would find an image of Wonder Woman chained up and staring down the gunman confidently far more dramatic. What does she know that he doesn't? How is she going to get out of this? These are questions that I can't answer. Will she survive, though? That's a question I can answer... and my next question, knowing that they feel the main draw of the issue is "WILL WONDER WOMAN SURVIVE?", would have to be, "Yes. Why should I care?"

I'm open to different interpretations of concepts and ideas, but a character not reacting to an intense and obviously dangerous situation seems like the precise opposite of drama.

The cover is not supposed to make you think "Wow, I bet Wonder Woman dies this time". It's supposed to make you think "Holy crap--WW looks like she's really in for it this time. How did it get this bad? And, yes, how does she get out?" Her reaction appropriately reflects what's at stake in the story inside. Sure, I know she'll live, but there should be some sense of danger along the way. Smiling cockily into a gun barrel doesn't convey that.

I see this, and I just roll my eyes. It's shocking, yes - Wonder Woman reduced to near tears would be. But dramatic? Where, precisely, is the drama in that cover?

Also, note, I am not against the cover because it is degrading to Wonder Woman. I am against it because it is dull, and purposely sacrificed artistry for shock.

I don't think that's given Bolland a fair shake (though I'm biased, since I think he's a terrific artist). I don't think he's really doing anything out of the ordinary by showing the hero dead to rights and reacting appropriately to it.

Edit: Wow, Kurt Busiek! How awesome.

Black Atom

09-09-2009, 08:36 PM

Ultimately, its the artist/writer and publisher who decide what is appropriate to sell to the public. This cover, I believe was a display of poor taste.

But why? I mean, this isn't dramatically out of the norm for a superhero cover, is it?

For instance, one my favorite Spider-Man covers is the cover to Amazing Spider-Man #39. On it, the Green Goblin is flying over the city with Peter Parker in tow, his civilian clothes torn and tattered revealing his costume underneath, indicating that the Goblin has not only defeated Spider-Man, but learned his true identity. I used to redraw and reinterpret this picture several times over and yet it never came out as compelling as John Romita's original. For one, he's just a much better artist than me, but I also realized that everytime I drew Peter I drew with the typical grim and defiant look of your typical hero in dangerous situation. On John Romita's cover, Peter almost wears a look of resignation. He's defeated, demoralized. That's what sells it--that's what makes it work. That's great drama man.

froinlaven

09-09-2009, 09:01 PM

On John Romita's cover, Peter almost wears a look of resignation. He's defeated, demoralized. That's what sells it--that's what makes it work. That's great drama man

I wouldn't go that far. Looks like he's pissed and is trying to break the ropes. If I remember correctly, he is high off the Goblin's gas and if telling himself that he is thankful the goblin is dragging him away from Aunt May so she's not hurt by the battle.

But why? I mean, this isn't dramatically out of the norm for a superhero cover, is it?

For instance, one my favorite Spider-Man covers is the cover to Amazing Spider-Man #39. On it, the Green Goblin is flying over the city with Peter Parker in tow, his civilian clothes torn and tattered revealing his costume underneath, indicating that the Goblin has not only defeated Spider-Man, but learned his true identity. I used to redraw and reinterpret this picture several times over and yet it never came out as compelling as John Romita's original. For one, he's just a much better artist than me, but I also realized that everytime I drew Peter I drew with the typical grim and defiant look of your typical hero in dangerous situation. On John Romita's cover, Peter almost wears a look of resignation. He's defeated, demoralized. That's what sells it--that's what makes it work. That's great drama man.

You can come up with many different comic book covers and/or panels that show heroes defeated or bound, but there is a major difference. Seeing Spider-Man tied up and being dragged around in the air by the green goblin is different than seeing a woman in tattered clothing chained to the ground with a dog dish in front of her.

I can't speak for everyone else, but when I see the cover to Amazing Spider-Man #39, the main feeling I get from it (besides it being a classic story) is that Spidey is in trouble and his arch-enemy has him trapped and unmasked. The feeling I get when I see the Wonder Woman #67 cover is that supports the exploitation of women through bondage fantasies.

But maybe I'm reading too much into it. Who knows, all different types of people get all different types of feelings from certain images.

WorstThingUS

09-09-2009, 09:31 PM

Apply that same logic in the example I gave above.

Put your mother or your sister or best female friend in that exact same image (somebody who you know is alive), and then tell me you'd think it "looks good."

While I clearly hate the cover I believe it's a mistake to use arguments like "Picture your or your sister here" because I wouldn't want my father or my brother going through this either:
http://www.bscreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/300px-batman_497.jpg

Heroes are supposed to go through pain and struggle. That she's in some sort of jeopardy isn't the issue. The issue is it's unheroic in a way you'd never have for Superman or Batman, terrified, bound and squirming. I personally believe that's something that, sadly, seems okay for WW because she's a woman.

I don't think that's given Bolland a fair shake (though I'm biased, since I think he's a terrific artist). I don't think he's really doing anything out of the ordinary by showing the hero dead to rights and reacting appropriately to it.

You think that Wonder Woman crying and squirming is the appropriate reaction from her character? A warrior trained from birth? A seasoned superhero? Exactly how is that appropriate?

froinlaven

09-09-2009, 10:14 PM

You think that Wonder Woman crying and squirming is the appropriate reaction from her character? A warrior trained from birth? A seasoned superhero? Exactly how is that appropriate?

I also am interested in the response to this.

AndyMangels

09-10-2009, 02:27 AM

While I clearly hate the cover I believe it's a mistake to use arguments like "Picture your or your sister here" because I wouldn't want my father or my brother going through this either:
http://www.bscreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/300px-batman_497.jpg

Heroes are supposed to go through pain and struggle. That she's in some sort of jeopardy isn't the issue. The issue is it's unheroic in a way you'd never have for Superman or Batman, terrified, bound and squirming. I personally believe that's something that, sadly, seems okay for WW because she's a woman.

Point taken from others that picturing real people on comic covers or iconic movie posters is not the same as fictional characters. But my point was for people to try to get outside of their societally-based dogma that says it's somehow OK to degrade women in imagery. The "picture your mother" comment was attempting to use transference and show that "She looks like a slut" is not as offensive as "Your momma looks like a slut."

And the Bane cover is a good example of this NOT being done to Batman. Look at his pose. He's MID-fight. Both hands are balled up to punch. Both legs are arched as he's clearly JUST been slammed down on the knee. He's not crying or sweating or pulling away. He's been horribly injured IN a fight. And for that matter, we don't know his back is broken without looking inside. I've seen wrestlers (which Bane resembles) do this EXACT same act, and both guys walk away.

To use a real-world example, it's the difference between a beaten-down boxer after a fight with his back on the ropes and arms extended, and a beaten-down Matthew Shepherd after being gay-bashed with his back on the fence and his arms extended. Both are similar poses and both came from violence. One would be acceptable for a newspaper to publish. The other probably would not.

There was a recent Kick-Ass cover from Marvel that was perhaps comparative, but the badly beaten hero is still defiant. AND it's a Mature Readers book. Without looking back at them, I'd hazard a guess that there's been some covers of The Boys where some characters have been brutalized. But again, Mature Readers.

To make this WW cover really the equivalent for Batman (or comparable icon), you'd have to show him tied to a chair, unmasked, cringing in terror, sweating, ready to cry and about to die.

But you wouldn't see that because he's "the goddamn Batman."

Black Atom

09-10-2009, 09:58 AM

I wouldn't go that far. Looks like he's pissed and is trying to break the ropes. If I remember correctly, he is high off the Goblin's gas and if telling himself that he is thankful the goblin is dragging him away from Aunt May so she's not hurt by the battle.

I'm not sure the cover is supposed to represent the exact context of the scene as it transpires in the story. Most don't. And I guess, like anything, it's open to interpretation.

You can come up with many different comic book covers and/or panels that show heroes defeated or bound, but there is a major difference. Seeing Spider-Man tied up and being dragged around in the air by the green goblin is different than seeing a woman in tattered clothing chained to the ground with a dog dish in front of her.

I can't speak for everyone else, but when I see the cover to Amazing Spider-Man #39, the main feeling I get from it (besides it being a classic story) is that Spidey is in trouble and his arch-enemy has him trapped and unmasked. The feeling I get when I see the Wonder Woman #67 cover is that supports the exploitation of women through bondage fantasies.

But maybe I'm reading too much into it. Who knows, all different types of people get all different types of feelings from certain images.

Evidently.

Black Atom

09-10-2009, 10:32 AM

Heroes are supposed to go through pain and struggle. That she's in some sort of jeopardy isn't the issue. The issue is it's unheroic in a way you'd never have for Superman or Batman, terrified, bound and squirming. I personally believe that's something that, sadly, seems okay for WW because she's a woman.

Are you sure? Because I'm pretty sure Superman doubles over and squirms like a baby anytime someone whips out the slightest bit of Kryptonite. Heck, in Superman's last movie he did more groveling than Wonder Woman is doing on this cover. There are covers with Spider-Man blatantly crying on them.

You think that Wonder Woman crying and squirming is the appropriate reaction from her character? A warrior trained from birth? A seasoned superhero? Exactly how is that appropriate?

For starters, Wonder Woman isn't a trained warrior from birth. Unless it's been RetConned, Diana was never allowed to fight the demon's at the doorway like the other Amazons. Remember, Diana was upset when she thought Julia shot and killed the Cheetah. The Wonder Woman who twists people's heads around with the steely calm of a professional hitman came along a bit later. At the time this cover came out, DC still toyed with the idea of a Wonder Woman that was vulnerable, human and likeable, not Thor with fallopian tubes. But I digress.

Anyhow, to me it doesn't look like she's frightened or crying. It looks like she's steeling herself for getting shot in the head (which would've been lethal to her at the time).

WorstThingUS

09-10-2009, 11:08 AM

Are you sure? Because I'm pretty sure Superman doubles over and squirms like a baby anytime someone whips out the slightest bit of Kryptonite. Heck, in Superman's last movie he did more groveling than Wonder Woman is doing on this cover. There are covers with Spider-Man blatantly crying on them.

The difference being Superman actually is dying if kryptonite is in front of him. Is Spider-man shedding tears because some bad guy is threatening him? No. Let's stick to the context, shall we?

For starters, Wonder Woman isn't a trained warrior from birth. Unless it's been RetConned, Diana was never allowed to fight the demon's at the doorway like the other Amazons. Remember, Diana was upset when she thought Julia shot and killed the Cheetah. The Wonder Woman who twists people's heads around with the steely calm of a professional hitman came along a bit later. At the time this cover came out, DC still toyed with the idea of a Wonder Woman that was vulnerable, human and likeable, not Thor with fallopian tubes. But I digress.

Not being allowed to fight at the doorway and not being trained is not the same thing. After all, if she had no training, she wouldn't have one the contest, now would she? There's nothing even remotely Amazonian about squirming in the face of death. It goes against every standard she spent her entire life learning.

Anyhow, to me it doesn't look like she's frightened or crying. It looks like she's steeling herself for getting shot in the head (which would've been lethal to her at the time).

Steeling oneself usually results in a very grim visage. Wonder Woman #64 shows the depiction of someone "steeling" themselves, so Bolland clearly differentiates between them:

http://www.coverbrowser.com/image/wonder-woman-1987/64-1.jpg

Black Atom

09-10-2009, 11:25 AM

The difference being Superman actually is dying if kryptonite is in front of him. Is Spider-man shedding tears because some bad guy is threatening him? No. Let's stick to the context, shall we?

That seems like splitting hairs. Regardless of the situation, Superman still looks weakened and helpless. If it were WW, it would garner the same level of scrutiny as this cover, regardless of the context.

Not being allowed to fight at the doorway and not being trained is not the same thing. After all, if she had no training, she wouldn't have one the contest, now would she? There's nothing even remotely Amazonian about squirming in the face of death. It goes against every standard she spent her entire life learning.

She was trained in martial arts and other sports, obviously. That has nothing to do with being a seasoned warrior. The way she was characterized showed that she clearly wasn't one. What you're trained to do and what happens when bodies start falling is usually pretty different. There's nothing weak or lame about wanting to live.

Steeling oneself usually results in a very grim visage. Wonder Woman #64 shows the depiction of someone "steeling" themselves, so Bolland clearly differentiates between them:

http://www.coverbrowser.com/image/wonder-woman-1987/64-1.jpg

Let's stay in context shall we? The situations don't seem comparable. It seems like the child's being shot at here, not WW.

CarolStrick

09-10-2009, 11:50 AM

I remember being upset by the kid cover. I don't like seeing kids in danger. If Wondie were in a better position so we could see the kid was absolutely safe, I would take it better.

As for the gun-to-the-head cover, it also shocked me and not in a good way. I don't like to look at it.

Both covers are beautifully, no, gorgeously done and I'm sure they caught the readers' eyes, but wouldn't it have been nice to find some slightly different situation/pose?

Kurt Busiek

09-10-2009, 12:38 PM

Let's stay in context shall we? The situations don't seem comparable. It seems like the child's being shot at here, not WW.

And, for that matter, WW is free and capable of defending them both.

Being determined to block a bullet with your indestructible bracelet and super-speed is not the same situation as being chained up and bracing yourself to be shot in the head not just at point-blank range but at contact range.

Whatever problems the cover might have, they're not analogous.

kdb

WorstThingUS

09-12-2009, 09:36 PM

She was trained in martial arts and other sports, obviously. That has nothing to do with being a seasoned warrior. The way she was characterized showed that she clearly wasn't one. What you're trained to do and what happens when bodies start falling is usually pretty different. There's nothing weak or lame about wanting to live.

This story occurs in issue #83, not issue #1. She's been off the island for awhile now and fought quite a few battles from Ares to aliens and that's just in her own book and not counting her adventures with the JLA. She's also been through War of the Gods which left her---hmmm, what's the word I'm looking for here---dead, which is not to be confused with her very first adventure where she was near death, so some bozo with a gun is the last thing that should intimidate her. It's a bad, out-of-character-cover.

Wonder Watcher

09-13-2009, 04:46 PM

This story occurs in issue #83, not issue #1. She's been off the island for awhile now and fought quite a few battles from Ares to aliens and that's just in her own book and not counting her adventures with the JLA. She's also been through War of the Gods which left her---hmmm, what's the word I'm looking for here---dead, which is not to be confused with her very first adventure where she was near death, so some bozo with a gun is the last thing that should intimidate her. It's a bad, out-of-character-cover.The point of a comic book cover is to elicit a reaction from a reader and ideally get them to pick up the book.

Surprising and shocking images are often used to achieve this. Having Diana sweating and grimacing (note not crying and begging for mercy) as someone pulled the trigger achieves this.

I'd say the cover did it's job.

WorstThingUS

09-13-2009, 04:52 PM

The point of a comic book cover is to elicit a reaction from a reader and ideally get them to pick up the book.

Surprising and shocking images are often used to achieve this. Having Diana sweating and grimacing (note not crying and begging for mercy) as someone pulled the trigger achieves this.

I'd say the cover did it's job.

I'd say anyone who wouldn't have picked up this issue of Wonder Woman otherwise has some issues they need to address.

Black Atom

09-13-2009, 05:09 PM

I'd say anyone who wouldn't have picked up this issue of Wonder Woman otherwise has some issues they need to address.

That seems strong.

Don't get me wrong, I understand where you're coming from, really. I just didn't interpret the cover the same way. Like Wonder Watcher said, the purpose of a given cover is to be sensational and shocking. Sometimes it's takes the events of the story and twists them into a different context to get a response from a potential reader.