Home› Comics Talk Community - The On Topic Forum

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In Register

Categories

Options

Another DC Variant Cover series coming... I hope

luke52luke52 Posts: 1,392
in Comics Talk Community - The On Topic Forum
Check out these beautiful covers from Juan Carlos Ruiz Burgos.

I really hope these are going to have their own variant month at DC. Just stunning stuff.


http://robot6.comicbookresources.com/2014/09/dc-favorites-make-headlines-in-saturday-evening-post-tributes/
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • Options
    RickMRickM Posts: 407
    The Saturday Evening Post masthead evokes nostalgia, but doesn't really make sense, since the publication wasn't known for cheesecake shots or violence.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    luke52luke52 Posts: 1,392
    You'll have to forgive my ignorance relating to this magazine as it was a bit before my time. Not sure if it was published in the UK either. So not sure if these covers are in keeping with the history of the publication.

    Violence aside, I wouldn't agree with these being cheesecake. The images aren't over sexualised in my opinion. Especially for this day and age. I really like the nostalgia for the age they evoke. I'm a big fan of this 30's/40's style Rockwell-esque art. I think they're really cool covers. Think they'd sell well too. They just look real cool :D
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    Mr_CosmicMr_Cosmic Posts: 3,200
    The Saturday Evening Post covers were most famously done by Norman Rockwell who painted scenes of family and rural American life.

    image

    I think the Clark Kent one fits perfectly while the Poison Ivy piece, for example, doesn't fit the SEP.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    RickMRickM Posts: 407
    The Poison Ivy image isn't sexualized? She's naked.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    RepoManRepoMan Posts: 327
    Huh? So just being naked means the image is sexualized? :-/
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    luke52luke52 Posts: 1,392
    Oh no, this is the bombshells debate all over again...
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    hauberkhauberk Posts: 1,511
    luke52 said:

    Oh no, this is the bombshells debate all over again...

    Not really. The bombshells were cheesecake and that has a pretty clearly sexualized. Admittedly, much of the inspiration, actual bomber nose art was much more suggestive
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    WetRatsWetRats Posts: 6,314
    luke52 said:

    Violence aside, I wouldn't agree with these being cheesecake. The images aren't over sexualised in my opinion.

    Cheesecake isn't oversexualized.

    It's just sexualized enough to be fun without being creepy.

    That's what makes it cheesecake, as opposed to porn.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    RickMRickM Posts: 407
    WetRats said:

    luke52 said:

    Violence aside, I wouldn't agree with these being cheesecake. The images aren't over sexualised in my opinion.

    Cheesecake isn't oversexualized.

    It's just sexualized enough to be fun without being creepy.

    That's what makes it cheesecake, as opposed to porn.
    I agree. And the Saturday Evening Post (and Norman Rockwell) didn't dabble in either one.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    hauberkhauberk Posts: 1,511
    RickM said:

    WetRats said:

    luke52 said:

    Violence aside, I wouldn't agree with these being cheesecake. The images aren't over sexualised in my opinion.

    Cheesecake isn't oversexualized.

    It's just sexualized enough to be fun without being creepy.

    That's what makes it cheesecake, as opposed to porn.
    I agree. And the Saturday Evening Post (and Norman Rockwell) didn't dabble in either one.

    Does that mean that Maxfield Parrish, Rubins et al dabbled in cheesecake?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    WetRatsWetRats Posts: 6,314
    hauberk said:

    RickM said:

    WetRats said:

    luke52 said:

    Violence aside, I wouldn't agree with these being cheesecake. The images aren't over sexualised in my opinion.

    Cheesecake isn't oversexualized.

    It's just sexualized enough to be fun without being creepy.

    That's what makes it cheesecake, as opposed to porn.
    I agree. And the Saturday Evening Post (and Norman Rockwell) didn't dabble in either one.
    Does that mean that Maxfield Parrish, Rubins et al dabbled in cheesecake?
    I suppose so...
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    TorchsongTorchsong Posts: 2,794
    WetRats said:

    luke52 said:

    Violence aside, I wouldn't agree with these being cheesecake. The images aren't over sexualised in my opinion.

    Cheesecake isn't oversexualized.

    It's just sexualized enough to be fun without being creepy.

    That's what makes it cheesecake, as opposed to porn.
    There you go! :)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    luke52luke52 Posts: 1,392
    WetRats said:

    luke52 said:

    Violence aside, I wouldn't agree with these being cheesecake. The images aren't over sexualised in my opinion.

    Cheesecake isn't oversexualized.

    It's just sexualized enough to be fun without being creepy.

    That's what makes it cheesecake, as opposed to porn.
    I go back to repomans point. Why does naked necassarily mean the image is sexual??

    Isn't cheesecake an idealised image of a woman? If so,I don't see any of these images as that and therefore not sexual. Just because a woman is naked doesn't necassarilly make it sexual or even attractive. To me cheesecake is a matter of opinion. But that's just mine. We're all welcome to our own.

    Question... Do you like the images? Or is it just the fact they are under the SEP banner that you take exception to?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    WetRatsWetRats Posts: 6,314
    luke52 said:

    Question... Do you like the images? Or is it just the fact they are under the SEP banner that you take exception to?

    I like all five images.

    The Wonder Woman, Zatanna and especially the Superman one would make fine SEP covers.

    The composition and the characters in the Ivy one is very Rockwellian, but clearly the (rather innocent) nudity doesn't belong on the Post.

    The Joker and Harley one is the biggest stretch, mainly for the dynamism of the image.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    WetRatsWetRats Posts: 6,314
    luke52 said:

    Isn't cheesecake an idealised image of a woman?

    I guess we're having two parallel conversations.

    I'm quibbling* about the definition of cheesecake as "oversexualized".

    Though it's a pretty subtle distinction, I wouldn't say "idealized" so much as "romanticized", though sex, or the implied promise of sex is certainly a part of what I consider cheesecake.


    *Me? Quibbling? :D
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    RickMRickM Posts: 407
    Yes, this is two separate conversations.

    If the images had just been presented as is, then no problem; its just another riff on the variant cover/nostalgia/sexy rockabilly girl thing that's been popular lately. My quibble was with the lazy insertion of the Saturday Evening Post masthead on a couple of images. It's kinda like mixing up Bettie Page and Ozzie and Harriet; although both things existed at the same time, they didn't intersect.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    WetRatsWetRats Posts: 6,314
    RickM said:

    Yes, this is two separate conversations.

    If the images had just been presented as is, then no problem; its just another riff on the variant cover/nostalgia/sexy rockabilly girl thing that's been popular lately. My quibble was with the lazy insertion of the Saturday Evening Post masthead on a couple of images. It's kinda like mixing up Bettie Page and Ozzie and Harriet; although both things existed at the same time, they didn't intersect.

    I think the Clark Kent one would have made a great SEP cover.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    bralinatorbralinator Posts: 5,967
    edited September 2014
    RickM said:

    Yes, this is two separate conversations.

    If the images had just been presented as is, then no problem; its just another riff on the variant cover/nostalgia/sexy rockabilly girl thing that's been popular lately. My quibble was with the lazy insertion of the Saturday Evening Post masthead on a couple of images. It's kinda like mixing up Bettie Page and Ozzie and Harriet; although both things existed at the same time, they didn't intersect.

    Agreed.
    WetRats said:


    I think the Clark Kent one would have made a great SEP cover.

    I agree, and probably the only one.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.