To be fair - because being fair IS important - with a contortionist the card would say "Spines should NOT work that way!"Areloch said:
Comments on Buzzfeed's real women in comic book poses
- Thread starter Robert B. Marks
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Actually, just in terms of aiming for oversexualization and hitting Lovecraftian horror instead, there was this Neptunia game played by Loading Ready Run on their stream that managed to nearly put me into a fetal position. It was a dialogue scene where two scantily clad characters were talking to the player characters. And then, the breasts of one of the scantily clad characters bounced. On their own. Without her actually moving. Under their own power.
Breasts do not work that way, and when they do in a game, it is not sexy. It is terrifying.
Breasts do not work that way, and when they do in a game, it is not sexy. It is terrifying.
Honestly, they picked the wrong women to do the wrong kind of poses.Robert B. Marks said:
asides from the camera man's obvious problem with perspective in certain shots you can hardly make an XL woman do what a supposed super athletic gymnastic person would and should do.
1
-The Spider Woman pose is incredibly easy for a women with the right body type to do, what the buzzfeed people seemed to forget here is that Spider Woman is partially elevated in this shot and perhaps her arms are drawn a bit too short, her left leg doesn't even show if it's actually touching the ledge at all.
The young woman complains about her ass not being able to take that shape... well that's cause she doesn't have that ass plain and simple.
-the photoshopped version is even worse because it completely misses the point of the original pose.
2
-it's a bit of an odd pose here but if you've ever seen a lady doing squats you know it's possible, the hands in the air might be the hardest part here.
- the photoshop makes it obvious that she's not this limber and that her body could not take the pose, aside from that her commentary of "muscles she's never used before" may be 100% on point.
3
- is pretty spot on for what she's supposed to achieve
- the photoshop was not needed, you can hardly expect someone to pose for a shot that was taken in midair.
Her own commentary supports that it could be done despite the drama she pours over it.
4
- the pose is spot on, it didn't need anything
- the photoshop is ridiculous, you can't expect a woman of that size to pose like that, then take everything away with some bad photoshop and expect it to look good.
5
- perspective is important, this pose is done all wrong.
- body type and perspective don't even match in the photoshop version.
6
- how did they even expect this to work? I have no words for it, the lady in purple can't ever match psylockes agility not looking like that.
- for one thing (which you can see from the bad photoshop) is that Psylocke is actually longer, that already made this woman a ridiculous pick without her body being taken into perspective (<ha see what I did there).
-Another is that Psylocke again is a character in mid-air, this is impossible to recreate simply like this, never even mind the full pose by itself.
Disclaimer:
I'm not trying to fat shame here, I'm simply pointing out that there is a degree of body control and posture someone with the wrong body type could never hope to muster as much as they wanted to.
Seriously bad article, bad pictures for the most part, wrong picks for the poses.
People tend to criticise art not just because they don't like other people enjoying it (they're not literal Grinches), but because they'd like to see the medium get better. That's why I criticise films/games/books.aba1 said:
Y'think they chose those designs for comedic purposes? That's not the reason (though it says quite a bit that one could genuinely think they were joking).Johnny Novgorod said:
Yeah, I agree with this. For a lot of them I couldn't tell how much of the photoshopping went into putting them in the spine-contorting pose, and how much of it was just to get the woman to be the proper body type.Politrukk said:
They should redo this with some women with more similar body types.
Cthulboob F'tatagn!Robert B. Marks said:
OT: Buzzfeed be buzzfeed. Ridiculous poses be ridiculous. Still not as bad as Rob "BLOODPOUCHES" Liefeld.
Body types are one thing but one must also take into consideration the limberness and athleticism that the super heroines actually bring on-board.Bad Player said:
All these women complain about "having to do more yoga" the thing being ofcourse that if you were wanting to pose like this, if you wanted to look like say spiderwoman, a lot more than yoga would be involved.
I wouldn't say they're equal, because although Spiderman does do a lot of squatting and crawling, those aren't conventionally sexy poses for men. A woman squatting with her legs open is an FHM pose - but a guy doing the same thing isn't exactly what you'd expect from a Burt Reynolds photoshoot. With spiderman, you can be fairly confident the writers weren't aiming to put him in a sexy pose for the benefit of a presumed straight female audience.Luminous_Umbra said:
Buzzfeed? Trigger warning? Oh, this gon' be good.
Or not. Seriously, who feels the burning urge to write these painfully right-on articles, "bravely" tackling the most low-hanging fruit they could possibly find?
- Yes, comic book physiques tend to be idealised and exaggerated representations of the male, female, and sometimes nonhuman form.
- Every comic book artist has their own style which ranges somewhere between realism and straight-out cartoony.
- Some artists furthermore aren't very good at human anatomy beyond faces and the main muscle groups. Comic artists are also famously under a lot of pressure to meet deadlines. Screw-ups happen. The superheroes may not be mere mortals, but their artists certainly are.
- The fact that the "real women" can't replicate poses? Some of that is down to body type, some of it is due to trying to statically recreate a pose which in the comic is being done in action. That in itself doesn't convincingly make the point this silly article is presumably trying to make.
- Yes, some of the poses are flat-out impossible... but again, see the "artistic license" and "eh, artists screw up" points above.
When all's said and done though, would I rather read a comic drawn in the usual exaggerated style, or one featuring "real" women in sensible poses? The former, please, and I suspect I may be in the majority there. As long as the current style sells, it won't change.
Or not. Seriously, who feels the burning urge to write these painfully right-on articles, "bravely" tackling the most low-hanging fruit they could possibly find?
- Yes, comic book physiques tend to be idealised and exaggerated representations of the male, female, and sometimes nonhuman form.
- Every comic book artist has their own style which ranges somewhere between realism and straight-out cartoony.
- Some artists furthermore aren't very good at human anatomy beyond faces and the main muscle groups. Comic artists are also famously under a lot of pressure to meet deadlines. Screw-ups happen. The superheroes may not be mere mortals, but their artists certainly are.
- The fact that the "real women" can't replicate poses? Some of that is down to body type, some of it is due to trying to statically recreate a pose which in the comic is being done in action. That in itself doesn't convincingly make the point this silly article is presumably trying to make.
- Yes, some of the poses are flat-out impossible... but again, see the "artistic license" and "eh, artists screw up" points above.
When all's said and done though, would I rather read a comic drawn in the usual exaggerated style, or one featuring "real" women in sensible poses? The former, please, and I suspect I may be in the majority there. As long as the current style sells, it won't change.
So... I am confused. Why the fat women? Why make fat women do poses skinny women do everyday? Of course these fat women can't do Yoga poses- I am fat and can't do the poses they can do either. So why?
Now if they got, say, an actual gymnast or amateur yoga practitioner to do these poses or hell, a cheerleader from ('Murican) football to do them, then this would have been a great article. As is... it's just... pointless. Not even funny, just... pointless.
Now how about that Star Wars!? It's gonna kill at the box office next week :3
Now if they got, say, an actual gymnast or amateur yoga practitioner to do these poses or hell, a cheerleader from ('Murican) football to do them, then this would have been a great article. As is... it's just... pointless. Not even funny, just... pointless.
Now how about that Star Wars!? It's gonna kill at the box office next week :3
Are we supposed to be outraged that so much photoshop is required to make "regular" women (chunky/overweight is more accurate) match fictional comic book characters?
The real outrage is the amount of photoshop it takes to make Bruce Willis match Homer Simpson!!!!
Unrealistic standards I tell you!
The real outrage is the amount of photoshop it takes to make Bruce Willis match Homer Simpson!!!!
Unrealistic standards I tell you!
You know, its probably already been pointed out, but I'm going to do it again.Robert B. Marks said:
For the good portion of these, the inability to maintain or assume the pose comes not from the ridiculousness of the pose itself, but because the woman in question in significantly overweight and/or out of shape.
And I'll say it again, a good portion of these aren't meant to be "held" or be standing poses - they're mid-action/mid-movement sequences, and your body and spine and can get into some pretty interesting shapes at those times.
Being exploited for sexy? Obviously? Physically impossible? Not at all.
You know, its probably already been pointed out, but I'm going to do it again.Robert B. Marks said:
For the good portion of these, the inability to maintain or assume the pose comes not from the ridiculousness of the pose itself, but because the woman in question in significantly overweight and/or out of shape.
And I'll say it again, a good portion of these aren't meant to be "held" or be standing poses - they're mid-action/mid-movement sequences, and your body and spine and can get into some pretty interesting shapes at those times.
Being exploited for sexy? Obviously. Physically impossible? Not at all.
How are primary sexual characteristics and secondary sexual characteristics not both sexual characteristics? Looks kinda cut and dried.ravenshrike said:
Oh yeah. That game. That was weird. I'm not sure which was worse, the breast bouncing, or the fact that to get said bounce, the character models kinda looked like they were mildly asphyxiated. Heavy breathing for all!Robert B. Marks said:
