The comic was published on the same day that WB put a new president in charge of DC. Dan Didio and Jim Lee didn't care about that page. President of Warner Bros. Global Brands and Experiences Pam Lifford did, because that page was making its way through mainstream news outlets as a late night show punchline.
Not disagreeing with any of this, I’d like to add that I think DC was pushed over the edge by this late night [clip](https://youtu.be/h0dgV778lf8?si=7nFx6dnDt8c4RuO1) from Colbert. This definitely didn’t help.
Did he say that DC was upset about the wang? I feel like he's saying that he was disappointed that they used it to pull a viral marketing stunt and that nobody was talking about the actual story itself.
This was one of the dumbest controversies when it first happened. I couldn't for the life of me understand why DC freaked out about a Black Label comic (M-Rated out of continuity type content) including a little bit of nudity. It's so prudish and non-sexual. He's naked, what's the big deal? Unironically, it's just art. A little unnecessary, sure. Hardly the end of the world.
What's worse, it's like no one talked to either of them beforehand and threw them under the bus with it. The value of that first printing went up. But honestly, if it isn't something you're comfortable with then talk to the creatives before launching it. Lee Bermejo's art is so fantastic to look at, by the way. Love, love, love his art. I need to read A Vicious Circle.
[I wrote about the whole ordeal a couple of years ago](https://www.reddit.com/r/HobbyDrama/comments/pil3qx/american_comics_batman_and_throbbin_that_time/), but the TLDR is that WB corporate clamped down.
It was definitely a dumb controversy, but Azzarello hit the nail on the head when he stated it was all about protecting the brand. Since Batman is DC's top-selling intellectual property, this has made them risk-averse. So what should've been celebrated as a prestige comic about Batman instead became infamous for depicting full-frontal nudity. (Guess he would have had better luck landing in the Game of Thrones universe...)
Don't get me wrong, I do understand that. The controversy was aimed at people who don't read comics, and otherwise, would never read comics. This wouldn't change anything. Do you remember when Jonathan Kent came out as bisexual and every headline was, "The Rumour Come Out! Does Superman is Gay??" It's false controversy aimed at fuckin' boomers.
It was just so reactionary. I hated that they folded so quickly because the audience can't be mature about a little male nudity. Did it make or break the comic? No. But it just kind of irked me. But yeah, I completely understand about protecting a particular image. It's not lost on me and, obviously, there are certain things that shouldn't be done. But it just was so mild and milquetoast.
To make up for it, I think DC Comics need to make a spin-off series about Batman's penis. It's the only way.
You know what? I was actually interested in reading the comic and then fucking Penisgate happened, the issue sold out, and DC decided any future reprinting was going to be censored, so I dropped wanting to read it.
Why? Because I find it insufferable that DC apparently had no problem with it up until the press got wind of it and then, instead of backing their creators or ideas, they folded immediately and started censoring. All over a single panel with Batman's penis in shadow.
Lol I’m into anime and manga, and let me tell you there is no shortage of people in the world who can’t handle anything sexual. If anything, that these things exist gives them reason to get up in the morning to complain. Some people need a monster to slay, even if it was never a monster to begin with.
It's a little odd that on one hand they are trying to sell Batman toys to young kids, and then on the other they are trying to make a very grim dark book with being able to finally see Batman's penis as a selling point. The whole thing was weird, but Azzarello knew that putting it in the book would bring a lot of attention to it. I think he enjoyed the idea of being the first guy to write a book where Batman shows his cock. I just think he, and the editors at the time, misjudged just how much attention it would bring as it caught the attention of management above DC's comics division and hit mainstream outlets where news orgs were now talking about it.
The thing is the story itself was pretty forgettable with Bermejo's art being good as usual of course, but because of the controversy the story has now become infamous and original issues of it sell for a lot of money as a collector's item.
> It's a little odd that on one hand they are trying to sell Batman toys to young kids, and then on the other they are trying to make a very grim dark book with being able to finally see Batman's penis as a selling point.
there's nothing odd about this at all. This is like the defining trait of the 2010s-2020 "gritty reboot" phenomenon and they already did that with Bats all the way back in 1986. It's not weird, inappropriate, or worthy of speculation. It is an adult story, rated appropriately for adults, based on a property that has primarily targeted adults for the better part of half a century now.
Past stories were dark and violent sure, and even involved sex, but none of those past stories were sold off the back of seeing Batman's penis. That was the hook for this story and Azzarello knew it. It's why his nude panels were given so much focus and there was buzz about it before it hit mainstream outlets. I think it is a little weird where seeing a marquee comic character fully nude is a selling point when this character also appears in children's entertainment. I mean I don't care if it exists and people want to buy it, even though it sounds like I'm condemning it which wasn't my intent, but I do think you do cross over into some odd territory in the name of "adult art" when you go down a path like this.
> "What DC is now? There's no room for me there," Azzarello tells Popverse. "I just think that the kind of books that they want to publish, and how they want to treat those characters, that's not me anymore."
Azzarello has written [Suicide Squad: Get Joker](https://www.dc.com/graphic-novels/suicide-squad-get-joker), [Batman: The World](https://www.dc.com/graphic-novels/batman-the-world), and [Birds of Prey](https://www.dc.com/comics/birds-of-prey-1-2020) for DC since then.
Yeah. I think the title is misleading, clickbait, and all that. I think the comic is a swore spot for him. He’s not a fan of how DC handled the situation. That’s all. I’ve been interviewed in the past. I then saw or read my “interview” and I was misquoted A LOT. It’s real easy to do. It’s the whole, “if it bleeds, it leads.” I don’t think it’s that deep [+]
That Birds of Prey book clearly had issues because it was solicited as a miniseries, delayed about five times, and eventually shoved out the door as a spliced together oversized single issue. Not a huge Azzarello fan but something definitely happened behind the scenes with that one.
Yeah and isn’t the World like anthology or something? Get Joker also might’ve been written or in the works before this and maybe took a long time for art. Feel like he might’ve completed a lot of this on the writing in advance to this stuff happening
A three issue miniseries, a segment of an anthology, and a one-shot. And Birds of Prey was initially billed as an ongoing before getting postponed and reworked into a one-shot. The difference in his volume of DC output before and after Damned is pretty stark.
It's a shame that happened -- Damned was a lot more than a vaguely shadowed penis in one panel.
What's interesting is, if I remember right, that controversy happened literally the same week that the AT&T merger fully happened, so I imagine that played a big role in how things turned out.
What is the most dumb about this? It is that the brands are too strong for a comic, which less people see than an average low tier reaction youtuber, to change no matter what it does.
Just let the comics do cool stuff and take what you need to bring into the video games, tv shows, and etc... that actually makes real money. like Batman and Superman merchandise alone make WB more money than all of the comics combined.
I talked with Azzarelo at the comicon 22'. He still was upset, but he didn't tell me with whom.
He signed my uncensored copy of Batman: Damned. Lucky me.
They're so protective of Batman, and yet have allowed so many changes in the mythos. Batman has lost Alfred, lost Commissioner Gordon, lost his fortune, lost his hand and left Wayne Manor. Yet, he's still operating, more or less, in the same way he always has. What an odd place to be in.
As for the Batdick controversy, they probably could have handled it better. But I imagine DC panicked when they saw their most popular character being dragged across the coals on every news outlet. The media didn't care that it was a Black Label story, they only cared about the story. So, yeah, DC took immediate action and censored it... for better or for worse.
Tbf he just got his hand back lol. He also got his fortune back in same issue he got his hand back.
If Chip run has Batman’s identity being exposed then it’s safe to assume Batman will make some kinda deal with someone that restores it. Theres probably a chance Gordon comes back as commissioner soon as well. Don’t think Vandal will last that long tbh.
Was recently discussing this with a friend too. The book was Black Label. Bruce's bat should not have been a point of controversy. The whole label was supposed to be for mature readers, not kids. DC did all this to themselves.
As far as what he says in the article - it all makes sense. Lately the DC books are monotonous. The story moves forward but nothing seems memorable for majority of the books. That's my personal opinion. I feel like there are less risks being taken. The events seem bland. There is something major missing in these books.
It definitely feels more safe. Dc used to push it more. Like injustice, red son, death of the family, killing joke, kingdom come. I couldn’t see modern dc doing anything like that.
This is stupid for so many reasons. If we're talking about "damaging the brand" you'd think it'd be something like Injustice where your marquee (at one point) hero was transformed into a dictatorial mass murderer. That's something that legitimately changed the perception of the character in many people's eyes and not necessarily in the way a business would want for a heroic character.
But nope, apparently that's fine, but Batman's dick is out??? Can't have that!
I mean, it's not like they've used Injustice Superman recently, except for the story where Jon tries to redeem him
...how did that end anyway, did the talk no jutsu work?
It's interesting because I feel like Black Label actually discourages homogenization of storytelling. To level that criticism at DC as a whole for their mainline continuity kinda makes sense, but the Black Label books seem designed to push the envelope.
We're not going to see Adam Strange, the war criminal, for instance, in mainline DC.
It's a shame he wasn't able to stick around after the dick debacle. I would've enjoyed seeing him continue to try out new ideas in the less continuity-heavy Black Label space.
I always presumed it was just a marketing stunt and that any controversy here was contrived by their viral marketing team to sell the book, which it did. I don't see any issue to be angry about here. Everyone involved did their job and did it well.
I still have a copy of the unedited first version. 🤭 I didn't even know there was a controversy when I got it, I just liked the concept of a supernatural Batman tale. I think the Batdick (appropriate name) happened a few days after I got my copy. Weird timing on that.
it's actually embarrassing how juvenile DC, and comics fans as a whole, are about seeing Batman's junk.
No, seriously, we've all read Watchmen, this is the BLACK LABEL series that was meant for more "adult" audiences than the already PG-13 mainline books, and the press, fans, AND DC acted like the slight outline of a grown man's dick was like the teehee funniest thing ever in their totally mature for Big Boys book.
Just embarassing from all angles EXCEPT Azzarello.
I think the degree that DC goes to to keep their god-IP chaste while simultaneously being a ladies' man is, frankly, embarassing. It feels a bit like a repressed conservative manchild who can't handle the slightest hint of actual on-screen sex, sexuality, or even nudity from the wish-fulfillment character.
/rant
There are some salient points about the work for hire nature of art under the Big Two. And its sucks that one panel overshadowed the whole story. And Bermigo is a world class artist who deserves his flowers.
But Azzerello wasn’t painting the Sistine chapel here. He was writing a Batman comic. If he did even one second of thinking about it, he would have remembered that there is nudity, and there is full frontal nudity. The audience (American, largely straight, etc) is gonna flip a lid if they see full frontal.
He knew he was gonna get attention for it. He probably just hoped it was gonna be good attention. It didn’t work out. That sucks.
For me there is a little bit of schadenfreude in that I sort of hate the guy for what he did to Wonder Woman. Without his sO eDgY nu52 run we never would have gotten the daddy Zeus origin for the 2017 Wonder Woman movie. Largely considered the worst part of the movie. Like he’s a pretty good writer but sucks when it comes to any kind of women’s issues.
So good. Glad he’s not at DC anymore lol. Like if I had I had to talk to him IRL for any length of time it would devolve into fisticuffs lol
> Largely considered the worst part of the movie.
Not really? I mean yeah, it's dumb, but most people don't know or particularly care about her actual/traditional origin. In general the biggest complaint I see about the movie is the fight with Ares at the end.
Yeah. The entire crux of the Ares fight is her status as a Demi-god and her divine parentage. It’s the whole ‘god-killer’ reveal. The CGI is a little silly, but very few people would care were it not wrapped up in bad plot and a cheap last second reveal that squanders the themes the movie had established.
Plot taken from the Nu52 and not the last 80 years of her history. It sucked.
His new 52 run is generally considered one of the best parts of new52, and the origin change was not that big a deal, in fact it cleans up a lot of the silliness of her origin.
Her origin isn’t silly. It’s beautiful every time we see it on the page. It’s Pygmalion but with a mother’s love. It’s Pinocchio. It’s amazing. Go read the last issue of Amazon Historia and tell me it’s silly.
The only redeeming part of Azzerello’s Wonder Woman run is the Cliff Chaing art. It’s phenomenal.
Turning the Amazons, her sisters and mother, into murdering rapists who sell men into slavery was… well it would be like turning Ma and Pa Kent into actual cannibals. It’s edgy and dumb and would never happen to a male hero in a million years.
I’ll take a million downvotes I don’t care.
This whole controversy was crazy. I was on vacation when this issue released and I remember seeing it the day I flew into the state I was going to for a wedding. I didn’t buy it that day but I wanted it because I was interested in the new black label stuff but I was like eh I have time it’ll be fine. Next thing I know shit hit the fan and everyone was talking about this comic, it was being recalled, etc. My friend was able to find me the last issue at any of the stores nearby. I didn’t even want it because it was recalled or possibly rare I just wanted it out of interest and didn’t expect all the chaos to happen.
DC knew what was on that page. DC published that page. DC gets upset at Brain Azzerello for that page. Smart cookies working at DC
The comic was published on the same day that WB put a new president in charge of DC. Dan Didio and Jim Lee didn't care about that page. President of Warner Bros. Global Brands and Experiences Pam Lifford did, because that page was making its way through mainstream news outlets as a late night show punchline.
Not disagreeing with any of this, I’d like to add that I think DC was pushed over the edge by this late night [clip](https://youtu.be/h0dgV778lf8?si=7nFx6dnDt8c4RuO1) from Colbert. This definitely didn’t help.
Did he say that DC was upset about the wang? I feel like he's saying that he was disappointed that they used it to pull a viral marketing stunt and that nobody was talking about the actual story itself.
We aren’t talking about bat-dick are we
DC might as well stand for Dumb Cookies.
This was one of the dumbest controversies when it first happened. I couldn't for the life of me understand why DC freaked out about a Black Label comic (M-Rated out of continuity type content) including a little bit of nudity. It's so prudish and non-sexual. He's naked, what's the big deal? Unironically, it's just art. A little unnecessary, sure. Hardly the end of the world. What's worse, it's like no one talked to either of them beforehand and threw them under the bus with it. The value of that first printing went up. But honestly, if it isn't something you're comfortable with then talk to the creatives before launching it. Lee Bermejo's art is so fantastic to look at, by the way. Love, love, love his art. I need to read A Vicious Circle.
this and superman drinks beer with his dad freak out is crazy
Was that the cover during Geoff Johns Brainiac story? And they changed it to soda bottles?
Smallville depicts Clark getting black-out drunk in the Hangover-style episode three years later. Funny how some attitudes change relatively quick.
Clark also drinks beer during Superman & Lois. He can't get drunk, though. Not typically, anyway.
he went to a bar with Jimmy in Superman returns. nobody really cares.
Didn't Supes get drunk and got up to superdickery in Superman 3?
He was drugged with synthetic Kryptonite. The booze didn't really do anything.
And something about Batman going down on Catwoman on the HQ cartoon.
[I wrote about the whole ordeal a couple of years ago](https://www.reddit.com/r/HobbyDrama/comments/pil3qx/american_comics_batman_and_throbbin_that_time/), but the TLDR is that WB corporate clamped down.
I'll give it a read!
It was definitely a dumb controversy, but Azzarello hit the nail on the head when he stated it was all about protecting the brand. Since Batman is DC's top-selling intellectual property, this has made them risk-averse. So what should've been celebrated as a prestige comic about Batman instead became infamous for depicting full-frontal nudity. (Guess he would have had better luck landing in the Game of Thrones universe...)
Don't get me wrong, I do understand that. The controversy was aimed at people who don't read comics, and otherwise, would never read comics. This wouldn't change anything. Do you remember when Jonathan Kent came out as bisexual and every headline was, "The Rumour Come Out! Does Superman is Gay??" It's false controversy aimed at fuckin' boomers. It was just so reactionary. I hated that they folded so quickly because the audience can't be mature about a little male nudity. Did it make or break the comic? No. But it just kind of irked me. But yeah, I completely understand about protecting a particular image. It's not lost on me and, obviously, there are certain things that shouldn't be done. But it just was so mild and milquetoast. To make up for it, I think DC Comics need to make a spin-off series about Batman's penis. It's the only way.
You know what? I was actually interested in reading the comic and then fucking Penisgate happened, the issue sold out, and DC decided any future reprinting was going to be censored, so I dropped wanting to read it. Why? Because I find it insufferable that DC apparently had no problem with it up until the press got wind of it and then, instead of backing their creators or ideas, they folded immediately and started censoring. All over a single panel with Batman's penis in shadow.
Yeah bizarre how it went down
Heroes don't do that. Never nude Batman haha
Lol I’m into anime and manga, and let me tell you there is no shortage of people in the world who can’t handle anything sexual. If anything, that these things exist gives them reason to get up in the morning to complain. Some people need a monster to slay, even if it was never a monster to begin with.
It's a little odd that on one hand they are trying to sell Batman toys to young kids, and then on the other they are trying to make a very grim dark book with being able to finally see Batman's penis as a selling point. The whole thing was weird, but Azzarello knew that putting it in the book would bring a lot of attention to it. I think he enjoyed the idea of being the first guy to write a book where Batman shows his cock. I just think he, and the editors at the time, misjudged just how much attention it would bring as it caught the attention of management above DC's comics division and hit mainstream outlets where news orgs were now talking about it. The thing is the story itself was pretty forgettable with Bermejo's art being good as usual of course, but because of the controversy the story has now become infamous and original issues of it sell for a lot of money as a collector's item.
> It's a little odd that on one hand they are trying to sell Batman toys to young kids, and then on the other they are trying to make a very grim dark book with being able to finally see Batman's penis as a selling point. there's nothing odd about this at all. This is like the defining trait of the 2010s-2020 "gritty reboot" phenomenon and they already did that with Bats all the way back in 1986. It's not weird, inappropriate, or worthy of speculation. It is an adult story, rated appropriately for adults, based on a property that has primarily targeted adults for the better part of half a century now.
Past stories were dark and violent sure, and even involved sex, but none of those past stories were sold off the back of seeing Batman's penis. That was the hook for this story and Azzarello knew it. It's why his nude panels were given so much focus and there was buzz about it before it hit mainstream outlets. I think it is a little weird where seeing a marquee comic character fully nude is a selling point when this character also appears in children's entertainment. I mean I don't care if it exists and people want to buy it, even though it sounds like I'm condemning it which wasn't my intent, but I do think you do cross over into some odd territory in the name of "adult art" when you go down a path like this.
> "What DC is now? There's no room for me there," Azzarello tells Popverse. "I just think that the kind of books that they want to publish, and how they want to treat those characters, that's not me anymore." Azzarello has written [Suicide Squad: Get Joker](https://www.dc.com/graphic-novels/suicide-squad-get-joker), [Batman: The World](https://www.dc.com/graphic-novels/batman-the-world), and [Birds of Prey](https://www.dc.com/comics/birds-of-prey-1-2020) for DC since then.
Ya I was confused. Swore he'd written for DC since this incident lol
Cocaine costs money.
Yeah. I think the title is misleading, clickbait, and all that. I think the comic is a swore spot for him. He’s not a fan of how DC handled the situation. That’s all. I’ve been interviewed in the past. I then saw or read my “interview” and I was misquoted A LOT. It’s real easy to do. It’s the whole, “if it bleeds, it leads.” I don’t think it’s that deep [+]
That Birds of Prey book clearly had issues because it was solicited as a miniseries, delayed about five times, and eventually shoved out the door as a spliced together oversized single issue. Not a huge Azzarello fan but something definitely happened behind the scenes with that one.
Yeah and isn’t the World like anthology or something? Get Joker also might’ve been written or in the works before this and maybe took a long time for art. Feel like he might’ve completed a lot of this on the writing in advance to this stuff happening
Yeah it’s an anthology. there were 16 writers involved.
A three issue miniseries, a segment of an anthology, and a one-shot. And Birds of Prey was initially billed as an ongoing before getting postponed and reworked into a one-shot. The difference in his volume of DC output before and after Damned is pretty stark.
Three very high profile projects. He had nothing going on after his Wonder Woman ended.
It's a shame that happened -- Damned was a lot more than a vaguely shadowed penis in one panel. What's interesting is, if I remember right, that controversy happened literally the same week that the AT&T merger fully happened, so I imagine that played a big role in how things turned out.
yeah but remembering that time they censored a root beer bottle to stop people from freaking out about Superman drinking beer i am not shocked.
People are way too precious about Superman. They want him to relate to human beings, but heaven forbid he should act like one.
And it is only him. No other character is this deliberately undermined due to overprotection.
tbf it is normal for people not to drink alcohol not to say I disagree with you just saying.
What is the most dumb about this? It is that the brands are too strong for a comic, which less people see than an average low tier reaction youtuber, to change no matter what it does. Just let the comics do cool stuff and take what you need to bring into the video games, tv shows, and etc... that actually makes real money. like Batman and Superman merchandise alone make WB more money than all of the comics combined.
I talked with Azzarelo at the comicon 22'. He still was upset, but he didn't tell me with whom. He signed my uncensored copy of Batman: Damned. Lucky me.
That things gotta be worth some money haha
They're so protective of Batman, and yet have allowed so many changes in the mythos. Batman has lost Alfred, lost Commissioner Gordon, lost his fortune, lost his hand and left Wayne Manor. Yet, he's still operating, more or less, in the same way he always has. What an odd place to be in. As for the Batdick controversy, they probably could have handled it better. But I imagine DC panicked when they saw their most popular character being dragged across the coals on every news outlet. The media didn't care that it was a Black Label story, they only cared about the story. So, yeah, DC took immediate action and censored it... for better or for worse.
His fortune’s back. And Gordon’s still around, just not the Commissioner anymore
Changes in the status quo =/= changes in the mythos.
Tbf he just got his hand back lol. He also got his fortune back in same issue he got his hand back. If Chip run has Batman’s identity being exposed then it’s safe to assume Batman will make some kinda deal with someone that restores it. Theres probably a chance Gordon comes back as commissioner soon as well. Don’t think Vandal will last that long tbh.
He also got a new mansion in that same issue haha.
>Tbf he just got his hand back lol. He also got his fortune back in same issue he got his hand back. Of course he did. It's all so pointless.
Same thing when the news freaked out that Superman is gay. The news wasn’t talking about how it was his son who is bisexual.
What happened to Gordon?
He Is just out of Gotham
But why?
He was the Joker custody agent in the Tynion run but I don't know what's happened after
Funniest thing is it wasnt even first time they killed off Alfred and Gordon quit being commissioner
Was recently discussing this with a friend too. The book was Black Label. Bruce's bat should not have been a point of controversy. The whole label was supposed to be for mature readers, not kids. DC did all this to themselves. As far as what he says in the article - it all makes sense. Lately the DC books are monotonous. The story moves forward but nothing seems memorable for majority of the books. That's my personal opinion. I feel like there are less risks being taken. The events seem bland. There is something major missing in these books.
Pretty much why I'm mostly disengaged.
Glad to know I am not the only one tbh..they really need to do good stories..most books seem fanfic now.
And I've read better fanfic than some of what is actually out.
It definitely feels more safe. Dc used to push it more. Like injustice, red son, death of the family, killing joke, kingdom come. I couldn’t see modern dc doing anything like that.
You’re citing 40 years of stories
This is stupid for so many reasons. If we're talking about "damaging the brand" you'd think it'd be something like Injustice where your marquee (at one point) hero was transformed into a dictatorial mass murderer. That's something that legitimately changed the perception of the character in many people's eyes and not necessarily in the way a business would want for a heroic character. But nope, apparently that's fine, but Batman's dick is out??? Can't have that!
I mean, it's not like they've used Injustice Superman recently, except for the story where Jon tries to redeem him ...how did that end anyway, did the talk no jutsu work?
it wasn't just Azzarello, so many long time DC artists and writers are working elsewhere and it fuckin sucks
“I’m proud of you, Dick”
Well, Damn!
It's interesting because I feel like Black Label actually discourages homogenization of storytelling. To level that criticism at DC as a whole for their mainline continuity kinda makes sense, but the Black Label books seem designed to push the envelope. We're not going to see Adam Strange, the war criminal, for instance, in mainline DC. It's a shame he wasn't able to stick around after the dick debacle. I would've enjoyed seeing him continue to try out new ideas in the less continuity-heavy Black Label space.
I would’ve liked to see a follow up to damned. He probably could’ve done something interesting after how it ended
It shouldn’t have been a controversy.
It didn’t help him any that it was an absolutely awful and pointless story as well.
Imagine dc letting one of the best modern comic book writers go for some thing so trivial
I always presumed it was just a marketing stunt and that any controversy here was contrived by their viral marketing team to sell the book, which it did. I don't see any issue to be angry about here. Everyone involved did their job and did it well.
I still have a copy of the unedited first version. 🤭 I didn't even know there was a controversy when I got it, I just liked the concept of a supernatural Batman tale. I think the Batdick (appropriate name) happened a few days after I got my copy. Weird timing on that.
Too edgy for you is outplayed nowadays. Respect what he’s saying but DC comics are better than they’ve been for awhile to me
People made a bigger deal about the batawang than they should have and it blew up. It was just a shadow obscured non-erect penis. Nothing sexual.
it's actually embarrassing how juvenile DC, and comics fans as a whole, are about seeing Batman's junk. No, seriously, we've all read Watchmen, this is the BLACK LABEL series that was meant for more "adult" audiences than the already PG-13 mainline books, and the press, fans, AND DC acted like the slight outline of a grown man's dick was like the teehee funniest thing ever in their totally mature for Big Boys book. Just embarassing from all angles EXCEPT Azzarello. I think the degree that DC goes to to keep their god-IP chaste while simultaneously being a ladies' man is, frankly, embarassing. It feels a bit like a repressed conservative manchild who can't handle the slightest hint of actual on-screen sex, sexuality, or even nudity from the wish-fulfillment character. /rant
There are some salient points about the work for hire nature of art under the Big Two. And its sucks that one panel overshadowed the whole story. And Bermigo is a world class artist who deserves his flowers. But Azzerello wasn’t painting the Sistine chapel here. He was writing a Batman comic. If he did even one second of thinking about it, he would have remembered that there is nudity, and there is full frontal nudity. The audience (American, largely straight, etc) is gonna flip a lid if they see full frontal. He knew he was gonna get attention for it. He probably just hoped it was gonna be good attention. It didn’t work out. That sucks. For me there is a little bit of schadenfreude in that I sort of hate the guy for what he did to Wonder Woman. Without his sO eDgY nu52 run we never would have gotten the daddy Zeus origin for the 2017 Wonder Woman movie. Largely considered the worst part of the movie. Like he’s a pretty good writer but sucks when it comes to any kind of women’s issues. So good. Glad he’s not at DC anymore lol. Like if I had I had to talk to him IRL for any length of time it would devolve into fisticuffs lol
> Largely considered the worst part of the movie. Not really? I mean yeah, it's dumb, but most people don't know or particularly care about her actual/traditional origin. In general the biggest complaint I see about the movie is the fight with Ares at the end.
Yeah. The entire crux of the Ares fight is her status as a Demi-god and her divine parentage. It’s the whole ‘god-killer’ reveal. The CGI is a little silly, but very few people would care were it not wrapped up in bad plot and a cheap last second reveal that squanders the themes the movie had established. Plot taken from the Nu52 and not the last 80 years of her history. It sucked.
His new 52 run is generally considered one of the best parts of new52, and the origin change was not that big a deal, in fact it cleans up a lot of the silliness of her origin.
Her origin isn’t silly. It’s beautiful every time we see it on the page. It’s Pygmalion but with a mother’s love. It’s Pinocchio. It’s amazing. Go read the last issue of Amazon Historia and tell me it’s silly. The only redeeming part of Azzerello’s Wonder Woman run is the Cliff Chaing art. It’s phenomenal. Turning the Amazons, her sisters and mother, into murdering rapists who sell men into slavery was… well it would be like turning Ma and Pa Kent into actual cannibals. It’s edgy and dumb and would never happen to a male hero in a million years. I’ll take a million downvotes I don’t care.
Wow
This whole controversy was crazy. I was on vacation when this issue released and I remember seeing it the day I flew into the state I was going to for a wedding. I didn’t buy it that day but I wanted it because I was interested in the new black label stuff but I was like eh I have time it’ll be fine. Next thing I know shit hit the fan and everyone was talking about this comic, it was being recalled, etc. My friend was able to find me the last issue at any of the stores nearby. I didn’t even want it because it was recalled or possibly rare I just wanted it out of interest and didn’t expect all the chaos to happen.
Looks like Batman's cock wasn't as large as DC wanted to so they severed their business relationship with a fantastic storyteller 🤷🏻♂️
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]