comScore
  1. Mediaite
  2. Gossip Cop
  3. Geekosystem
  4. Styleite
  5. SportsGrid
  6. The Mary Sue
  7. The Maude
  8. The Braiser

What's with the name?

Allow us to explain.

Things We Saw Today

Things We Saw Today: Batman Whistling While He Works


A delightful one-hour drawing by Dustin Harbin titled Off to Bat-Work. (via Never Lose Hope) Check out what else we saw today! 

  • Artist Amy Reeder is officially off DC Comics’ Batwoman title. We could not be more heartbroken. She wrote on her Facebook page of the news, “It’s definitely regrettable…some real creative differences were going on, to the point that it became untenable.” Ok, now we’re angrier. (via DC Women Kicking Ass)

Topless Robot has a few images of brand-new Dark Knight Rises action figures from Mattel, specifically Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s John Blake and Michael Cain’s Alfred.

But wait! Where’s Anne Hathaway’s Selina Kyle/Catwoman. Oh, here she is…

That’s…not at all how we’ve seen Ms. Hathaway’s costume in the past, in fact, this is quite similar to the current comic book incarnation. Does Christopher Nolan has a surprise up his sleeve as far as costuming or is this just a weird mistake? (via DC Women Kicking Ass)

  • Ok, onto non-Bat-news, there’s been a lot of discussion about who uses birth control and why the last couple of weeks. Sarah Marian Seltzer from The Frisky writes an article explaining how she uses it for health reasons.
  • Starting in June, Marvel will offer free digital download codes in all of their $3.99 prices comic books. As of April, their $2.99 book covers will be printed on the same paper as the interior pages. (via Blog@ Newsarama)

I’ve seen a few maps depicting George R.R. Martin’s lands from A Song of Ice and Fire in my day but this one is extra detailed. A fan named TheMountainGoat created the visual by combining maps from the actual books as well as fan-made versions. (via Tor)

TAGS: | | | | | |


  • Kath

    Why be angry over Amy Reeder? She’s updated her blog and skirted around the issue, but it doesn’t particularly seem like anyone is to blame as such. Here’s the link: http://amyreeder.blogspot.com/2012/03/lot-of-you-have-heard-by-now-that-i.html

    It seems like it was a decision that was arrived at after some time, not a sudden “You’re off” one. Judging by her comments of it being “a struggle”, it sounds like it may have been out of her comfort zone and/or DC were pushing her towards JHW3′s style, which only a few artists can do.

    But the feedback to her issue was incredibly mixed anyway. Some people liked it, some didn’t, the majority agreed she wasn’t JHW3 and that she shouldn’t try and emulate him (one can only assume that the creative differences related to her style). If you look at DCWKA’s Disqus feed, and some of the tumblr notes, you’ll find that there’s some conflicting ideas and a number of “I like Reeder, but…” or “Reeder’s great, but…” comments.

    I personally love some of Reeder’s art. I have Supergirl #63 framed and displayed because I love the cover. But her interior work on BW #6 left a lot to be desired.

    I’d love to see DC have more women writers and artists, however – I think we all would – but I don’t think we should get “angry” over this. We should wait until the facts become clear, and we should then make a decision. Maybe DC ousted her, maybe she felt too pressured. We just don’t know.

  • http://www.thenerdybird.com/ Jill Pantozzi

    I’m angry because I was really enjoying her art on the book. I think I’m allowed to feel that way.

  • Kath

    Wording is the key. It states “we” above, which implies The Mary Sue as a whole is angry with it, which – in conjunction with “angrier” – implies something else with the series has upset the site.

    My point still stands, however; why get angry when we don’t know the facts yet? Reeder’s post is unclear, DC have – obviously – said very little on it. I’m not aware of JHW3 or WHB saying anything about it, either, so what do we have to go on? Reeder and DC couldn’t make it work for some reason, ergo she is off the title. Whether it’s some sort of problem with her art, whether it’s a persona issue on their side, whether it’s them utilising feedback from their readers, we just don’t know.

  • http://www.thenerdybird.com/ Jill Pantozzi

    Well, the other writers and I did discuss the issue and “we” are all pretty upset about it.

    Angry = initial news
    Angrier = Reeder’s comment, “some real creative differences were going on, to the point that it became untenable.”

    I personally am angry because an artist I love is no longer on a book I love. Period. I’m not going to be less angry if it was an agreeable exit on both parts. Just angry she’s not going to be on the book any longer, like I said.

  • Kath

    *Shrugs* I love her Supergirl art, but I didn’t like her Batwoman art beyond two of the variant covers she did. Too standard for Batwoman, in my opinion. But heck, even JHW3 had a rocky first issue with the new run (#1 had some very questionable moments).

    I think it’s more a disappointment than something vexing. You’ve every right to be angry, but I’m honestly not sure what there is to be angry about. It’s not like they’ve replaced her with Greg Land.

  • http://www.thenerdybird.com/ Jill Pantozzi

  • Kath

    I agree, Jill. Very eloquent.

  • Kath

    Sigh. Let me try this again.

    Why get angry? There is nothing to be angry about. Anger implies wrong-doing, it implies that someone somewhere has done something disagreeable. That has – as far as publicly visible evidence is concerned – not the case. Reeder and DC could not work it out, ergo she is off. Judging by the reaction of JHW3 and Reeder, this was not something that has been rooted in problems with DC, and perhaps something more on Reeder’s side of things judging by what she said – perhaps a contract dispute with regards to Batwoman if we go by the information she gave? It might be much more complicated than that, and I’m sure it is.

    But there’s something to be disappointed about. It implies sadness, and that you wish it was different. It’s disappointing Reeder and DC couldn’t come to an agreement, and that the artist will change mid-arc. It disrupts the feel, and consequently the tone of the story, and beyond that how it’s interpreted and received by the reader.

    It’s disappointing there’s one less woman on a DC title, yes. It’s disappointing she’s had to drop out mid-arc, yes. But it’s nothing worth getting angry about, because there is nothing to focus it at. There is no responsible party, no catalyst that fractured the arrangement.

    You know better than me that there are things in comics worth getting angry about. Whether it’s the use of certain artists, the changes to certain characters or the cancellation of titles. But this is not one of them – it’s wasted energy. Be sad, lament the loss of Reeder from the title, but don’t be angry because there is nothing to be angry at – *yet*. Maybe when/if the details are revealed we’ll find out the exact cause and maybe there’ll be something to be angry at then. But for now, all we know is that Reeder and DC conflicted over the direction of a character and that as a consequence, Reeder is out. We cannot assume foul play, but we also cannot assume fair play.

  • http://www.thenerdybird.com/ Jill Pantozzi

    I couldn’t reply to your latest comment but I’ll leave it at this. Anger is a complication emotion, we obviously have different definitions when it comes to when, and for what anger is warranted. I am also sad, disappointed, and as I wrote, heartbroken about this change as well. Her off the title may not be worth it for YOU to get angry about but for me, it is. This is something I personally choose to be angry about. I would hope you could respect that and stop trying to convince me I shouldn’t be. Thanks for the discussion.

  • http://twitter.com/Friendlessone James

    ” Anger implies wrong-doing, it implies that someone somewhere has done something disagreeable.”

    I have to disagree with this statement. I can and have been angry about things that have no wrong-doing as part of the situation. An example would be going for a walk and placing my phone on a picnic bench while I rest. The phone suddenly gets struck by lightning out of the clear blue sky. This would lead me to righteous fits of anger. There is no wrong-doing here and no one has done anything disagreeable. It is part of the human condition to become angry when something you like goes away, be it my phone or one of my favourite artists from a comic I have been enjoying.

  • http://twitter.com/acidragdoll Bel

     If she has every right nothing to be angry then stop policing her anger.

  • Francesca M

    I for one am just glad to see two things: Selina’s zipped all the way up and Practical Biker Boots!

  • John Wao

    …speaking of Game of Thrones I’m watching the entire series this weekend in glorious blu-ray. 

    The special features are simply put, amazing. Detailed histories of the world of A Song of Ice and Fire:
    A profile of every major character. A brief history of Westeros and Valyria.

    A discussion of the two major religions.

    A brief history of the Rebellion by Robert Baratheon. Told from various points of view.

    A history of every major House and the various regions of Westeros and some of Essos.

    All narrated by the various characters of Game of Thrones, Tywin, Bran, etc, in a motion comic style.The set includes a map, although not as detailed as the one above.

  • Frodo Baggins

    I’m buyin’ dis shit.

  • Anonymous

    Since you’ve decided to use the reactions of my blog to support your case which seems to be “Don’t feel the way you want to feel because I don’t think you should feel that way” I would like to add that I share Jill’s anger. I’d also say that you totally slanted the response to Reeder’s work on #6 to fit your opinion. I’m not sure why you didn’t like it, but the reviews were IIRC all positive not “incredibly mixed”.

  • Kath

    My case was that “I do not think anger is justified; but disappointment is”. As I said in one of my posts, I accept that some people may be angry, just that I did not see what there was to be angry about. But anyway, let’s move on…

    As for “slanting the response”, I did no such thing. I didn’t even refer to reviews, because I don’t read them. My opinions were based on feedback garnered from ComicsAlliance, the forums of Comic Book Resources, my own person opinion of Reeder’s work, the comments threads (notes and Disqus) on your own site and that of some friends.

    I’ve seen people say they liked Reeder’s work on #6, I’ve seen people suggest it could be better, I’ve seen some more negative comments. You name it, it’s out there. So yes, I would say that’s a mixed reaction to her work.

    But, then again, I was critical of Batwoman #1 and thought JHW3 drew some utterly unnecessary panels that almost ruined a few pages, so what do I know?