Bounding from obsession to obsession.
I've never objected to a short skirt in itself - I certainly spent my awkward teenage years playing sport in tiny skirts - but there needs to be something underneath it. Not a g-string!
Sadly I have an intense, illogical loathing of biking shorts, so if they're not going to finally just give the poor girl a pair of pants I'd actually rather they keep the damned super panties.
The artist is currently temporary.He's going to be replaced by Jim Balent after his three issue stint.(Okay...I am kidding about Balent)
Don't tease her with false Balent rumors. We all know its Land. He's got some great new Paris Hilton pics to (trace)use as a reference...
Liefeld's triumphant return!
Jenna Jameson fumetti.
I wasn't crazy about the art... she went from looking like Paris Hilton to looking like she's 12... there's got to be a middle ground somewhere...
Twelve? She looks 16-18 to me.
Won't be able to get to my LCS until tomorrow, but I'm really hoping that Supergirl eventually becomes a book I can give to my niece. She loves her JLU appearances but I can't give her the slutted up version.
I loved the art. And yes, I liked the panties underneath. I thought she looked athletic, maybe about 17. Her facial expressions were really good, too.
What, the super thong that Ma Kent made her not good enough anymore?I do like that this version of Supergirl looks like a human being wearing actual clothes (although the S symbol has shrunk a bit too much) instead of the freakishly thin alien she was introduced as, but it would have been nice if they'd made some tiny effort to acknowledge it as a story development rather than her getting a new and different style outfit effectively between panels because of a change of artist.
I picked this issue up solely for the new artist.If he's temporary, I guess so am I.
Marionette, I have to differ with you. I much prefer that there's no reference to Kara suddenly beginning to look like a human being and not a sex-toy. If the change were handled in continuity, I'd have to wonder what Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman were thinking letting her go out in that tramp-suit in the first place, let alone put the "S" on it. I prefer to regarded like Batman's variable-cape and amazing morphing bat-ears; I swear one day Sam Keith is going to have him put someone's eye out with those ears.-- Jack of Spades
Marionette, sometimes a comic's previous run is so bad that you've just got to move on with as little mention of it as possible. Marv Wolfman following Bruce Jones' Nightwing run was one case. Bedard's supergirl issue is another.Oh, and I read that the ARTIST (Guedes) was permanent and the WRITER (Bedard) was temporary.
I think it's funny that basically every single female superhero wears bikini-cut bottoms (or smaller) and there's no complaints, but since Supergirl wore hers under a *skirt* there was a problem.Wonder Woman can parade her star spangled ass around, but Supergirl was a bad girl because her bottoms were covered by a skirt and thus *underwear*...scandalous!
Nate, my problem with the SG "panties" had nothing to do with the skirt. It has to do with the fact that she's an underaged teen and not the grown woman Wonder Woman and Power Girl, etc, are.The skirt does become a factor, because when it was drawn fluffed out while she was flying, for ex, and she's wearing what was essentially a thong in how the panties were drawn, sometimes, they weren't there or that more was revealed than was proper for a 16 or 17-year-old.The issue is about appearance and appropriateness, especially when DC has made a point of trying to appeal to teen girl readers and Supergirl would be a natural fit with them. So displaying the right values becomes a concern.Another teen, without a skirt, is StarSpangled Girl. Courtney wears very appropriate bike shorts.
I'm just one guy, so my one comic purchased won't make a huge difference, but I wanted to put my money where my mouth was.Supergirl is not a title that holds much appeal for me, and I already spend far too much per week on comics as it is, but I had to support this artistic change of direction. I mean come on - a comic about a 17yo girl with super-powers which might actually appeal to 17yo girl readers?! What a crazy idea!I'ts a bit sad it's taken DC this long, but they should be rewarded with my $7 for listening to peoples concerns.
Guedes is the real deal on this book. Finally someone had the good sense to get this character back to basics. She looks and acts like a real woman, not some over-sexualized caricature and she kicks some ass. I loved this issue, the art is just so smooth and fluid, and even more amazing is how solid the story is even as a tie-in to Amazons Attack. Next issue she facesoff against Karate Kid, this is starting to get good.
"Nate, my problem with the SG "panties" had nothing to do with the skirt. It has to do with the fact that she's an underaged teen and not the grown woman Wonder Woman and Power Girl, etc, are."Yes, but my point still holds since there have been *plenty* of "teen" superheroines wearing the bikini-cut bottoms and they didn't catch the same amount of fuss Supergirl did."The skirt does become a factor, because when it was drawn fluffed out while she was flying, for ex, and she's wearing what was essentially a thong in how the panties were drawn, sometimes, they weren't there or that more was revealed than was proper for a 16 or 17-year-old."I admit I don't own every issue of the book or anything, but I certainly never saw her outright wearing a *thong*. In fact the vast majority of the time the skirt seemed to have magical qualities whereby it seemed to obscure any "panty" shots no matter what angle you were seeing her at or what she was doing."The issue is about appearance and appropriateness, especially when DC has made a point of trying to appeal to teen girl readers and Supergirl would be a natural fit with them. So displaying the right values becomes a concern."I agree the new Supergirl was sometimes tasteless, but it has more to do with how individual artists and writers handled her than her outfit or the cut of her bottoms.By the way, from what I've seen the new artist certainly seems to be talented, so no knock against him...just think it's odd how much controversy can be kicked up by a simple skirt.
Nate -- You're being a bit silly here. Right there you say that the panties were magically obscured by the skirt most times and that the real problem is how the artists and writers handled her.Well, this is an example of how this particular artist handles her. When giving a shot of her from below the skirt, he drew a pair of bicycle shorts rather than mess around with the skirt to show maximum leg without showing her privates.